U-M Kicks Off Environmental Semester

by Lee Bockhorn

Last week, the University ushered in the Winter term theme semester on the environment with a "Kickoff" ceremony held in the Kuenzel Room of the Michigan Union. The sounds of the Treetown Singers drum circle greeted the hundreds of students and faculty in attendance as they squeezed themselves into the room for a multimedia presentation and a keynote address by Michelle Jordan, the deputy regional administrator of Region 5 for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and a U of M Law School alumna.

The event began with remarks by School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE) student Mona Hanna, the chair of the student planning committee for the semester and also the chair of the Michigan Student Assembly's (MSA) Environmental Issues Commission. Hanna told those in attendance that the theme semester "has the potential to change the lives of each and every one of us," and also pointed out that this term's theme semester was unique because students had been involved for the first time in planning activities and events for the semester.

Hanna's remarks were followed by a short, "inspirational" multimedia presentation which consisted of images of natural beauty and various factoids about ecological damage and pollution set to music. Then, Provost Nancy Cantor took the podium to introduce the keynote speaker. Students listened intently as Cantor stated that it was "our responsibility to begin caring for the continuity of nature." She also said that this particular theme semester was important because of its role in "integrat[ing] the separate parts of the university individual colleges, administrators, faculty, and students."

Cantor was followed by Jordan, the featured speaker. Jordan began by commending the U of M for "being an early and long term supporter of the environment." She spoke about the daily responsibilities of her position at the EPA, where she is in charge of her region's air, water, hazardous waste, and other pollution control programs. Proclaiming that the United States has created "the world's most advanced environmental protection program," she recounted the government's efforts to protect the environment over the last three decades, from the creation of the EPA in 1970 and the passage of laws such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act in the early Seventies, to laws regulating everything from asbestos to nuclear waste passed in the Eighties. Stating that Congress had passed forty environmental laws since 1970, Jordan credited these laws and the EPA's enforcement with great improvements in the condition of our nation's environment. For instance, she claimed that the air in our cities was cleaner, and that the Clean Air Act has "worked for America without holding back our economy." Jordan cited studies which claim that the EPA's drinking water standards prevent 470,000 cases of gastro-intestinal illness annually. She declared that chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) production has "gone down dramatically," and that the Great Lakes "are a major environmental success story."

For all of this success, however, Jordan told the audience that much work remains to be done. Citing an array of statistics in areas like asthma cases among children, she said that global climate change was a significant problem, and that although there was still what she described as "scientific uncertainty" regarding global warming, it is imperative that we take action now. She cited the recent Kyoto treaty on global climate change as a "historic step" towards reducing global warming in an "environmentally and economically sound way." In closing, Jordan challenged the audience to "use your time, talent, and energy to preserve and protect the environment."

Upon leaving the kickoff, students had the chance to pick up free environmental semester t-shirts, information on theme semester activities, events, and classes, and to cavort with the theme semester mascot, the "Giant Green Bug" (or "Giant Green Frog," depending on whom you asked).

A RETHINKING OR AN INDOCTRINATION?

The theme semester's official title is "The Environmental Semester: Rethinking the Relationship." However, an examination of the kickoff and various other activities connected with the theme semester raises some question about whether the intention of the semester is truly to rethink the relationship between man and the environment, or simply to present students with a specific ideological viewpoint on environmental issues.

Jordan's keynote address was not encouraging in this regard. Lost among the litany of statistics she cited to tout the success of the EPA and environmental laws was any mention of the costs to businesses or consumers of compliance with these laws, or any discussion of the egregious infringement of private property rights which has occurred in the name of "protecting the environment." In her effusive praise for the Kyoto treaty, she neglected to note how the treaty unfairly places the burden of emissions reduction on the United States, while letting rapidly developing industrial nations such as China off the hook, or that even supporters of the treaty admitted that its actual enforcement in the U.S. would result in a dramatic rise in energy costs which many economists say would cripple the economy. She quickly glossed over the surface of the growing questions surrounding the scientific validity of global warming theories by saying that such "scientific uncertainties" should not prevent us from taking action. Finally, Jordan could not resist the temptation to include a plug for her boss in her address, saying that "protecting the health of America's children is one of President Clinton's highest priorities."

In an interview, Mona Hanna attempted to address concerns about the purposes of the theme semester. She said that her hopes for the semester are that it will be a "springboard to create long term environmental change on campus," and that it will "afford better relations between administration, faculty and students through interaction." When asked to respond to concerns that the theme semester intends to impose a certain ideological viewpoint of environmental issues on students, she stated, "we don't want to impose, we simply want to educate students and expose them to the facts and issues surrounding the environment and how it affects their daily lives."

Of course, "educate" is a difficult term to pin down. Truly educating students on issues surrounding the environment would entail a balanced presentation of all viewpoints on the issues; for instance, how laws concerning forestry might affect the logger, as well as the spotted owl. A theme semester which attempted this could truly claim to be "rethinking the relationship;" however, it is doubtful whether most of the activities, events, or courses planned for this theme semester will involve any such fundamental "rethinking" of the politically correct orthodoxy on environmental issues. For instance, while the film series for the semester includes the critically acclaimed Microcosmos, a fascinating up-close view of the insect world, it also includes such loaded material as the film Koyaanisquatsi, described in the theme semester brochure as "awe-inspiring wilderness photography contrasted with views of urban life, commercial use of land, and resulting human misery," and Walkabout, described as "the story of a brother and sister who are abandoned in the harsh Australian outback, and rescued by an Aborigine boy ... [it] captures the conflict between natural instincts and 'civilized' behavior that leads to tragedy for the young Aborigine." In other words, the films show that every time "urban life," "commercial use of land," and "civilized behavior" (in other words, evil capitalistic society) meet the natural world, nature inevitably gets the shaft.

What is even more disturbing is the apparent trend of theme semesters in general. Whether the theme is "death" or "food" (past examples), or the increasingly trendy themes of this year - "genders, bodies, and borders" last term and the environment this term - the theme semester concept reflects a growing problem in higher education. Since the capitulation of universities to the demands of student radicals in the 1960s to dismantle core curriculums, our universities have lost the conviction that there is any core canon of knowledge that they must pass on to their students. To fill this gaping hole they have resigned themselves to giving students whatever they want in the form of "theme semesters" on whatever topic is trendy at the moment, in U of M's case instead of what those students desperately need: a true liberal (in the best sense of that word) education. Anyone who truly fancies themselves concerned about the future should be as troubled by this as they are about the environment. MR

This article was published in the 21 January 1998 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 16, Number 6).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.