The Environmental Politics of Sacrifice

2. A Democratic Politics of Sacrifice?

2 A Democratic Politics of Sacrifice? John M. Meyer Must citizens of wealthy consumer societies sacrifice to avert the worst consequences of climate change and achieve environmental sustainability ? Many environmentalists suppose that considerable sacrifice is necessary but that it is unlikely to be achieved because these citizens are too self-satisfied, apathetic, or ignorant to change willingly. By contrast, other environmentalists reject the notion that sacrifices are necessary, asserting that new technologies can enable us to achieve a sustainable society painlessly. It might appear that these opposing positions represent the full range of possible answers to the question. In fact, these positions share commonplace—yet misguided—assumptions about self-interest and citizenship, justice and efficacy. By drawing these assumptions out of the shadows and subjecting them to the light of critical scrutiny, the limitations of the original question become evident, and new possibilities emerge. We can then see that while calls for sacrifice tend to reinforce paternalistic strains among environmentalists and therefore will be more likely to alienate than motivate, calling out sacrifice—recognizing, for example, that climate change is already leading to tremendous human and economic sacrifices—can help us identify obstacles to effective environmental action.1 In this way, sacrifice can reflect a democratic hope that citizen action might cultivate a better future. This stands in stark contrast to both the despair that leads some to contend that leaders must “get” people to sacrifice and the optimism that leads others to believe that an invisible hand will carry us into a clean and green society. Superficially, at least, the character of environmentalist calls for sacrifice —like the frequent and despairing invocation of “limits to growth” a generation ago—seems to foster a survivalist and so authoritarian 14 John M. Meyer tendency.2 After all, in a wide variety of contexts (the “war on terror” comes to mind) appealing to “expert” knowledge and warning of catastrophe in the absence of change has been a reliable basis for top-down, coercive political action. Yet this is not the only political role that talk of sacrifice might play. A democratic conception of sacrifice is possible and can promote connections between familiar environmentalist concerns and many people’s everyday lives, values, and experiences. Doing so cultivates sensitivity to the plurality of contexts and audiences in which sacrifice is invoked. It also enables us to recognize sacrifice in places where we otherwise might not. Only then can we begin to differentiate sacrifice by willing citizens, acting on behalf of higher concerns, from sacrifice imposed on unwilling victims, in violation of their interests. This provides a richer appreciation for the conditions of human flourishing, from which we can develop more salient criticisms of existing practices and stimulate effective action for change. In her recent meditation on race and American citizenship, Talking to Strangers, political theorist Danielle Allen offers one of the few substantive and constructive discussions of the politics of sacrifice in a democratic context.3 Allen builds much of her analysis through an interpretation of work by novelist and social critic Ralph Ellison. Although nothing in her book explicitly addresses environmental challenges, her discussion of sacrifice offers insight in this context. In the pages that follow, I draw liberally on her analysis to develop both the importance and possibilities for a democratic politics of sacrifice. Sacrifice and “Self-Interest” Sacrifice, n. 4.a. The destruction or surrender of something valued or desired for the sake of something having, or regarded as having, a higher or more pressing claim. —Oxford English Dictionary There is no such single thing, self-interest. —Danielle Allen, Talking to Strangers4 Sacrifice, in contemporary discourse, is often regarded as the negation or denial of self-interest—performed by heroes or saints, but not willingly by ordinary people. Sacrifice, in this sense, is often equated with A Democratic Politics of Sacrifice? 15 altruism.5 To rethink contemporary characterizations of personal sacrifice , we will first need to reexamine the notion of self-interest that lies at its core. While the equation of sacrifice with altruism is seen in arguments advocating sacrifice, it is even more readily found among those who reject sacrifice. To judge by a cursory search of the Web, among the most likely to associate both altruism and sacrifice with environmentalism are advocates of Ayn Rand’s libertarian philosophy of objectivism . Objectivists engage in antienvironmentalist diatribes premised on a dichotomy between egoism (good) and altruism (bad), which informs...