I think one of the most startling aspects of a concept such as the Anthropocene is its ability to elicit a sense of both optimism and pessimism. While reflecting on our past two weeks of class and readings, I realize that I have been consistently torn as to how to approach the topic. Recognizing the strength of Michael Maniates’s argument highlighting the futility of believing individuals have the power to save the Earth by planting a tree or riding a bike, I cannot help but to be slightly pessimistic. It is not exactly an empowering realization when you recognize the futility of your actions on an individual scale. Even further, facing the reality that the issue itself must be addressed on a global scale is terrifying.
(Picture from https://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/global_politics.html?mediapopup=12557573)
It is one thing to consider the feasibility of making changes in U.S. government or policy, but it is a whole other idea to attempt to make any ripple at all in the tightly, intricately bound web of international and global politics and environmental affairs. Doubting the feasibility and effectiveness of mounting a synchronized global response to the issue is easy; attempting to approach the issue with productive optimism is far more challenging, but inherently necessary. Sure, a solution to our global peril will be difficult to obtain and implement properly, but simply dismissing the possibility of any solution at all brings us no closer to addressing the fact that what is at stake is humanity itself. Although it is easy to fall back into a state of doubt, I am optimistic that it is possible for the positive qualities of humanity, such as compassion and innovation, to outweigh greed in the face of such a challenging global dilemma.