Derrick Jensen writes about how hope is the opposite of action. He claims that having hope is only passively having the desire that things in the world will get better as opposed to taking action yourself to change the way things are. If one only hopes, he asserts, then nothing gets accomplished because they are waiting on others to take action. Jensen also says that he believes his lack of hope is what propels him into action. He believes that not relying on hope will cause people to be proactive about any situation—the environment in particular.
I tend to agree with Jensen. I find that most people my age either don’t have an opinion on important issues or, if they do have an opinion, they remain on the sidelines and hope other people take action. I admit to being a member of the latter group. It is very easy to find excuses as to why you can’t be proactive (too busy, etc.), but if everyone tries relying on others to solve the world’s problems, no one will ever take action.
In lecture, many people defended the fact that most of our class knew next to nothing when it came to environmental issues but were able to answer the questions about materialistic topics. I think this parallels how people just hope things in the world will get better. Many people are willing to make excuses and be passive about the issues of the environment, but that is unproductive. Having empty hope is just as unproductive.
In class, most everyone was able to recognize the Mercedes-Benz logo but not the poison ivy plant. I realize it is much easier to be able to recognize logos since they are thrown at us and are shown with text, but nature is always all around us. Since it isn’t labeled, it is up to us to find out about it. We need to take action and find out for ourselves more about the environment, for that is the only way we can actively become informed. Gaining knowledge is what will encourage us to become active to help the environment. And perhaps, giving up on hope that things will get better will encourage us to inform ourselves.