As I walk the marketing path to sustainability, every now and then I am reminded of my detour to political science studies. Recently, I reflected here on the barriers to mass adoption of sustainability. Another, political barrier didn’t make it into the post. It expands on the idea adoption barrier, which holds that people are more accepting of ideas that align with what they already know and believe, and resist or suppress those that conflict with their views.
In brief, sustainability, as a concept and as a movement, is an offspring of leftish, American-liberal politics, spurred by the environmental causes of the 1960s. The principal ideological underpinning of liberalism is idealism, which concerns itself with how the world should be. In the current circumstances, sustainability is equally prescriptive, positing an ideal world that we must strive toward. Some of liberalism’s concerns – egalitarian distribution of prosperity (and power), social empowerment and justice, anti-corporate environmentalism – align with the triple bottom line goals of sustainability.
By contrast, American conservatism draws on realism, which has a strong tendency to see the world as it is and prefer the world to stay the way it is. The pursuit of self-interest and power dominate as goals. Realism and conservatism refute radical change – of the scope and magnitude sustainability proposes, example – and view grand solutions as inferior to solving problems within the existing political and institutional framework.
While power in the U.S. has alternated between the two parties, for terms or decades at a time, sustainability as a liberal ideas has a serious obstacle in the conservative outlook. The key to widespread adoption, as with any product, service, or idea, is to make it relevant to an individual.
The really fun part of this line of thought is that 1) a sustainable world is one where things stay as they are, albeit circulating in wasteless closed loops; and that, consequently, 2) once the vision of the sustainable world is attained, its proponents will work to ensure it stays that way.
What do you think?
***
Image credit: jonathan.broderick
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Comment from Facebook:
John Vogler said, “It has been long since I thought about the political science descriptions of liberalism and conservatism. I would rather not see anti-corporate and environmentalism so coupled. Corporations might move more slowly than public opinion, but public opinion will change corporate behavior. It is a fun thought that if we were able to fulfill our desire… Read More to have an ideal society, the conservative half would strive to maintain it. I can’t help but think of this as sustainability maintained by gridlock. Somewhat different than the California model of unsustainabilty maintained by gridlock.”