Battlefield Earth
This week the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard
Medical School presented its fourth annual Global Environment Citizen
Award to Bill Moyers. In presenting the award, Meryl Streep, a member
of the Center board, said, "Through resourceful, intrepid reportage
and perceptive voices from the forward edge of the debate, Moyers has
examined an environment under siege with the aim of engaging citizens."
Following is the text of Bill Moyers' response to Ms. Streep's
presentation of the award.
I accept this award on behalf of all the people behind the camera whom
you never see. And for all those scientists, advocates, activists, and
just plain citizens whose stories we have covered in reporting on how
environmental change affects our daily lives. We journalists are simply
beachcombers on the shores of other people's knowledge, other people's
experience, and other people's wisdom. We tell their stories.
The journalist who truly deserves this award is my friend, Bill McKibben.
He enjoys the most conspicuous place in my own pantheon of journalistic
heroes for his pioneer work in writing about the environment. His bestseller
The End of Nature carried on where Rachel Carson's Silent Spring left
off.
Writing in Mother Jones recently, Bill described how the problems we
journalists routinely cover ? conventional, manageable programs like budget
shortfalls and pollution ? may be about to convert to chaotic, unpredictable,
unmanageable situations. The most unmanageable of all, he writes, could
be the accelerating deterioration of the environment, creating perils
with huge momentum like the greenhouse effect that is causing the melt
of the arctic to release so much freshwater into the North Atlantic that
even the Pentagon is growing alarmed that a weakening gulf stream could
yield abrupt and overwhelming changes, the kind of changes that could
radically alter civilizations.
That's one challenge we journalists face ? how to tell such a story
without coming across as Cassandras, without turning off the people we
most want to understand what's happening, who must act on what they
read and hear.
As difficult as it is, however, for journalists to fashion a readable
narrative for complex issues without depressing our readers and viewers,
there is an even harder challenge ? to pierce the ideology that governs
official policy today. One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime
is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the
fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the oval office and in Congress.
For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly
of power in Washington. Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven
true; ideologues hold stoutly to a world view despite being contradicted
by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple,
their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there
is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.
Remember James Watt, President Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior?
My favorite online environmental journal, the ever engaging Grist, reminded
us recently of how James Watt told the US Congress that protecting natural
resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ.
In public testimony he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ
will come back."
Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was
talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out
across the country. They are the people who believe the bible is literally
true ? one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is
accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens
went to the polls believing in the rapture index. That's right ? the
rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books
in America today are the twelve volumes of the left-behind series written
by the Christian fundamentalist and religious right warrior, Timothy LaHaye.
These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in
the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate
passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated
the imagination of millions of Americans.
Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre (the British writer George
Monbiot recently did a brilliant dissection of it and I am indebted to
him for adding to my own understanding): once Israel has occupied the
rest of its "biblical lands," legions of the anti-Christ will
attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. As
the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return
for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and
transported to heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they
will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils,
sores, locusts, and frogs during the several years of tribulation that
follow.
I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature.
I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to
the West Bank. They are sincere, serious, and polite as they tell you
they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical
prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and
the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers.
It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted
in the Book of Revelations where four angels 'which are bound in the
great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man.'
A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but
welcomed ? an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last
time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144 ? just one point below
the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of god
will return, the righteous will enter heaven, and sinners will be condemned
to eternal hellfire.
So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to
Grist to read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist, Glenn
Scherer - 'the road to environmental apocalypse. Read it and you will
see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental
destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed ? even
hastened ? as a sign of the coming apocalypse.
As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe
lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the US
Congress before the recent election ? 231 legislators in total ? more
since the election ? are backed by the religious right. Forty-five senators
and 186 members of the 108th congress earned 80 to 100 percent approval
ratings from the three most influential Christian right advocacy groups.
They include Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Assistant Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell, Conference Chair Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Policy
Chair Jon Kyl of Arizona, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and Majority Whip
Roy Blunt. The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition
was Senator Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical
book of Amos on the senate floor: "the days will come, sayeth the
Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land." He seemed to be
relishing the thought.
And why not? There's a constituency for it. A 2002 TIME/CNN poll
found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in
the book of Revelations are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think
the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your
radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations or in the
motel turn some of the 250 Christian TV stations and you can hear some
of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under
the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts
it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth when
the droughts, floods, famine and pestilence brought by ecological collapse
are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the bible? Why care about global
climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And
why care about converting from oil to solar when the same god who performed
the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels
of light crude with a word?"
Because these people believe that until Christ does return, the lord
will provide. One of their texts is a high school history book, America's
providential history. You'll find there these words: "the secular
or socialist has a limited resource mentality and views the world as a
pie... that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece." However,
"[t]he Christian knows that the potential in god is unlimited and
that there is no shortage of resources in god's earth... while many
secularists view the world as overpopulated, Christians know that god
has made the earth sufficiently large with plenty of resources to accommodate
all of the people." No wonder Karl Rove goes around the White House
whistling that militant hymn, "Onward Christian Soldiers." He
turned out millions of the foot soldiers on November 2, including many
who have made the apocalypse a powerful driving force in modern American
politics.
I can see in the look on your faces just how had it is for the journalist
to report a story like this with any credibility. So let me put it on
a personal level. I myself don't know how to be in this world without
expecting a confident future and getting up every morning to do what I
can to bring it about. So I have always been an optimist. Now, however,
I think of my friend on Wall Street whom I once asked: "What do you
think of the market?" "I'm optimistic," he answered.
"Then why do you look so worried?" And he answered: "Because
I am not sure my optimism is justified."
I'm not, either. Once upon a time I agreed with the Eric Chivian
and the Center for Health and the Global Environment that people will
protect the natural environment when they realize its importance to their
health and to the health and lives of their children. Now I am not so
sure. It's not that I don't want to believe that ? it's just
that I read the news and connect the dots:
I read that the administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency
has declared the election a mandate for President Bush on the environment.
This for an administration that wants to rewrite the Clean Air Act, the
Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act protecting rare plant and
animal species and their habitats, as well as the National Environmental
Policy Act that requires the government to judge beforehand if actions
might damage natural resources.
That wants to relax pollution limits for ozone; eliminate vehicle tailpipe
inspections; and ease pollution standards for cars, sports utility vehicles
and diesel-powered big trucks and heavy equipment.
That wants a new international audit law to allow corporations to keep
certain information about environmental problems secret from the public.
That wants to drop all its new-source review suits against polluting
coal-fired power plans and weaken consent decrees reached earlier with
coal companies.
That wants to open the arctic wildlife refuge to drilling and increase
drilling in Padre Island National Seashore, the longest stretch of undeveloped
barrier island in the world and the last great coastal wild land in America.
I read the news just this week and learned how the Environmental Protection
Agency had planned to spend nine million dollars - $2 million of it from
the administration's friends at the American Chemistry Council - to
pay poor families to continue to use pesticides in their homes. These
pesticides have been linked to neurological damage in children, but instead
of ordering an end to their use, the government and the industry were
going to offer the families $970 each, as well as a camcorder and children's
clothing, to serve as guinea pigs for the study.
I read all this in the news.
I read the news just last night and learned that the administration's
friends at the international policy network, which is supported by Exxon
Mobile and others of like mind, have issued a new report that climate
change is "a myth, sea levels are not rising," scientists who
believe catastrophe is possible are "an embarrassment."
I not only read the news but the fine print of the recent appropriations
bill passed by Congress, with the obscure (and obscene) riders attached
to it: a clause removing all endangered species protections from pesticides;
language prohibiting judicial review for a forest in Oregon; a waiver
of environmental review for grazing permits on public lands; a rider pressed
by developers to weaken protection for crucial habitats in California.
I read all this and look up at the pictures on my desk, next to the
computer ? pictures of my grandchildren: Henry, age 12; of Thomas, age
10; of Nancy, 7; Jassie, 3; Sara Jane, nine months. I see the future looking
back at me from those photographs and I say, "Father, forgive us,
for we know now what we do." And then I am stopped short by the thought:
"That's not right. We do know what we are doing. We are stealing
their future. Betraying their trust. Despoiling their world."
And I ask myself: Why? Is it because we don't care? Because we are
greedy? Because we have lost our capacity for outrage, our ability to
sustain indignation at injustice?
What has happened to out moral imagination?
On the heath Lear asks Gloucester: 'How do you see the world?"
And Gloucester, who is blind, answers: "I see it feelingly.'"
I see it feelingly.
The news is not good these days. I can tell you, though, that as a journalist
I know the news is never the end of the story. The news can be the truth
that sets us free ? not only to feel but to fight for the future we want.
And the will to fight is the antidote to despair, the cure for cynicism,
and the answer to those faces looking back at me from those photographs
on my desk. What we need to match the science of human health is what
the ancient Israelites called "hocma" ? the science of the heart...
the capacity to see... to feel... and then to act... as if the future
depended on you.
Believe me, it does.
Bill Moyers is the host of the weekly public affairs
series NOW with Bill Moyers. Airs Friday nights on PBS.
|