Achieving sustainability is impossible without collective action, according
to Alan Durning in his book This Place
on Earth 2001. Gov. John Kitzhaber echoed that belief in his recent executive
order promoting sustainability, which states in part, "A number of significant
steps will be necessary to achieve a sustainable future and will require the
participation of all Oregonians."
To put it another way, Durning and Gov. Kitzhaber agree that making Oregon and
the rest of the country sustainable will require all citizens to work toward
this common goal.
But enlisting broad public support in the pursuit of a common goal, or common
good, seems to be easier said than done.
Linda C. Raeder, a political theorist at the Catholic University of America,
defines the common good simply as the general welfare or public interest.
In a recent article appearing in the Independent Review, a periodical,
Raeder noted that some political philosophers believe Americans have become
"ever more isolated, asocial, selfish" and that " …modern
men no longer recognize the existence of, let alone an obligation to pursue,
a comprehensive common good that transcends mere personal interest."
This bleak view of the citizenry is shared by others.
Newsweek columnist Robert J. Samuelson wrote, "We face a choice
between a society where people accept modest sacrifices for a common good or
a more contentious society where groups selfishly protect their own benefits."
Whether or not Americans have less willingness these days to work for the common
good is an open question. It should be noted that the terrible destruction caused
by the terrorist
attack in New York on Sept. 11, 2001, brought a national outpouring of solidarity
and support, including generous monetary donations for the victims.
But these current events notwithstanding, there does seem to be a prevailing
notion in our society that individual rights are of paramount importance. Some
critics believe this mindset is responsible for our apparent inability to deal
with the many problems that confront us.
For example, consider our health care system with its rising costs and shrinking
access; concern about business’ lack of social responsibility; worries
about environmental pollution and lack of investment in education; and national
anxiety over fluctuating crime and poverty rates.
Do these persistent troubles give indication that Americans have lost their
willingness to cooperate for the benefit of all? In an article "The Common
Good" appearing recently in Santa Clara University’s Issues
in Ethics newsletter, Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez offered the following
evidence that this may be the case:
Our pluralistic society. We are a nation of many people with different needs,
wants and ideas. According to some philosophers, the concept of a common good
is not consistent with the kind of pluralistic society that the United States
has become.
Individualism. Our traditions place great value on individual freedom and rights.
Within our culture, society is viewed as comprising independent individuals
free to pursue individual goals and interests without interference from others.
In this individualistic culture people tend to place pursuit of individual wants
and needs above efforts to work toward the common good.
Not all share the burden equally in sacrificing for the common good. For example,
making employment opportunities more equal may require that some groups, such
as white males, sacrifice their employment chances. Or, maintaining an unpolluted
environment may require that particular firms that pollute install costly pollution
control devices, undercutting profits.
Forcing particular groups or individuals to carry such unequal burdens for the
sake of the common good is, at least arguably, unjust.
Given all this, should we conclude that the public sense of the common good
has given way to individual wants and needs? Perhaps not. Our faith-based institutions,
in particular, continue to be a powerful force in teaching the idea of working
for the good of others in congregations and in communities. The religious community
in Oregon has taken this role a step further by becoming actively involved in
working toward sustainability goals.
A good example of this effort is the Interfaith Network for Earth Concerns formed
in the early 1990s by Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, a statewide association
of Oregon religious denominations.
"Churches throughout the state wanted to add their voice to the growing
debate about environmental, economic and community sustainability in Oregon,"
said Jenny Holmes, INEC program director. "The purpose of INEC is to support
the faith-based community in accomplishing this."
Religious values have strong connections to sustainability. Holmes noted that
the concept of sustainability and faith-based groups both share the core principles
of stewardship, justice and concern for future generations.
"Essentially our position is that we have to take responsibility for creation,"
said Holmes. "We care for this earth because it’s valued by the Creator."
The INEC carries that message forward, Holmes added, by offering its members
educational events, networking opportunities and an ongoing program of public
policy advocacy.
In addition to support for members, INEC also works to help religious institutions
become a broader resource for the community.
"In some areas, church congregations are the primary place where people
come together to think and talk about the good of the community," Holmes
said. "With sustainability, the church brings an ethical point of view
to the discussion as opposed to the economic aspects that are usually emphasized
outside the church."
Is it possible to strike a balance between the ethical and economic points of
view in our efforts to achieve a sustainable future? There are optimists who
believe we can find ways to agree on the things that are really important.
According to Alan Durning in his book This Place on Earth 2001,
"People will sacrifice for villages but they seem unwilling to sacrifice
for their planet." His point is that people will act together for a common
goal, but they must feel a strong attachment to what they are building or protecting,
or to put it another way, a sense of community. Maybe if we can find that sense
of community we will also find a sense of the common good.