You can almost the hear the deep sighs of frustration, appalling gasps of air and the occasional arrogant snort of aggression as industry leaders, environmental professionals, environmental activists and regulatory agencies wrestle in what seems to be never-ending negotiations to reach common ground and consensus on what it means to protect and sustain our environment. Those in the mix of defining economic gain know that globalization is nothing more than the incremental and powerful progression of the capitalistic ideology to produce wealth by creating and sustaining a heightened level of consumerism based on individual desires resulting from confounded perceptions between wants and needs. This confusion, created by the desire delusion, defines lifestyle and is vital to the success of capitalism, and, therefore, is the basis of economic stability and growth.
Consumers want someone else to bake the cake so it tastes like homemade, sell it as cheap as possible and clean up the mess when finished. All the while, they are consuming something that really isn't necessary for survival, but certainly seems to be at the time. Major decision makers in both the private and public sector realize this mentality defines who we are, like it or not. So what does any of this have to do with defining environmental protectionism? If we look at environmental policy and discourse over the past six months, it becomes evident.