Limits to armchair environmentalism

NEWDELHI: Every now and then, I get an email to forward, a phone number to give missed calls to, or a petition to sign. They usually annoy me because of their selfrighteousness. A middle-class individual sits at home, makes a missed call, and forwards an email. That’s it — they’ve done their bit to stop rivers from being polluted, ecosystems from being destroyed, etc., with no element of sacrifice in their own lifestyle at a landscape level.

Every time I point out that their actions mean little because change means a shift in our consumption and our loud protests against policies, they remind me that they aren’t activists.

That’s fine, everyone doesn’t have to be. But one does need to realise that armchair activism is best for one’s conscience, not the cause. And there is no loss of dignity in being on the roads, nonviolently.

Let’s look at what I see as one of our worst policies - river linking of the Ken and Betwa. Apart from drowning the best parts of Panna National Park, displacing and drowning tigers and devastating the river’s ecosystem, it won’t solve the water crisis in the medium term.

How will armchair environmentalism change that? You have to be disruptive, be on the roads, protest loudly while also advocating internally.

That’s why I urge everyone reading this to make whatever missed call you’d like to, but go home, talk to your councillor, your neighbours, the RWAs, and act at a ward level to reduce what you consume and be vociferous.