by Carolyn Baker from her blog.
I am posting this article because I believe it represents the major view of the Transition Movement, a view which I think distorts reality and thus gives us false leads out of this multi-dimensional crisis of climate change, peak energy, and economic collapse.
The addiction metaphor is a good one, one which I have used a lot. But like all metaphors, they are valid up to a point and I believe that the author, like many others in the Transition Movement, misses that point.
In this view the main addiction is to an abundant lifestyle based on industrial civilization and fueled by fossil fuels. And clearly the view holds that we are all responsible. This is where, I believe, the distortion lies.
I believe that the concept of "industrial civilization" as used here would be much more accurately described as an industrial economy organized under the capitalist system, or just simply capitalism. In mainstream media and many other places "industrial civilization" is used a synonym for capitalism with the hidden suggestion that "there is no alternative". Sometimes it, along with "market economy", "private enterprise", "American Way of Life", etc. are used as euphemisms for capitalism because the latter term carries many negative associations among some people--in other words, it is often avoided in "polite" company.
In any case, what the essay suggests is that we are all responsible and likewise we all must as individuals change our lifestyles. It is a moral argument that misses a huge reality and, because of that, I do not believe that any significant change is likely to occur from this perspective.
Once you frame the issue as an economy driven by the requisites of capitalism--the drive for profits (or wealth accumulation by individuals who constitute a class of people that have enormous influence over the lives of the rest of us that constitutes the vast majority of the world's population), then the way opens up for some real change strategies.