Passionate, succinct words. Let's hope Australia heeds them. Bravo.

Thankyou Noel. I will need to reread. How do we get to be influential and make a difference when the lack of sensitivity to the environment and our place in it is the predominant paradigm? Will it only be when peak oil really strikes? Will it only be when individualism comes up begging?

Over the centuries in the tradition of the British Isles, environments have been protected that they might serve us and serve human leisure. For those environments to be protected, man had to be placed within nature - maintaining animals for hunting, streams for fishing, and so forth - and yet above it, adapting it to his own ends like hunting, fishing and agriculture. Consider the image of the British countryside, and the symbol of the plough-horse which was used to boost Allied morale during the second world war... the close connection with nature only exists when it has been turned from wilderness into a human controlled environment. An holistic appreciation of nature which involves careful stewardship of it must involve human domination of it, yet awe over the miraculous thing which he rules, and knowledge of the difficulty with which he rules. The British command of environment lead to the use of animals, which which humans formed close bonds, in literature, as the ways of the country were stabilised and codified. In the Black Forest in Germany, a similar example exists with hunters, where tradition commands respect for animals and nature, and hunting in a manner which is proper and respectful... because human and animal interaction leads to a respect, and a propriety in our relations with nature.

Environmentalism and care for animals, once the domain of those of the country, is moving to the cities, and city-based environmentalism is dangerous in that it is ideological, almost theological, in its views of the environment... that humans are the problem, not the solution; that we must be parted from the land if it is to survive. To this, all I can say is that if nature exists and it serves nobody, neither tourism, nor industry, nor leisure, then it might as well not exist at all. Without us, it is mere chaos.

Industrialisation and colonisation changed the rules of the game... a situation mastered in rural areas of the British Isles and the Continent were unsuited for new environments are rapid industrialisation, yet nonetheless survived where they were born, that is, unless parliaments get in their way. Finding a way in a country like Australia to tame nature is difficult, it was no doubt difficult for the itinerant inhabitants of Australia, and will no doubt be for the settled ones too. In all, an ability to maintain lagoon waterways, and a constant clearing of difficult wooded shrub will encourage water retention, soil quality and plentiful grass and trees; laws do not necessarily encourage this yet. A domestication of the environment, mainly achieved through fishing, the rearing of beasts of leisure like horses, and constant communal action to erradicate pests, and maintain low numbers of other animals (such as Kangaroo) will lead to the establishment of a new culture which appreciates and manages the environment. This is not a task for the cities, but a task for those living in the country, as they shall form the personal and domestic ties to nature which are the true base of good stewardship.

The rest, especially a liberation theologist spin on environmental social justice, is mere folly. Nature is not just, it is rather the opposite: the young and snuffed out, the old and killed and debased. Only when humans can weild culture upon the environment, like a hunter killing his prey unawares with a shot to the head, then respectfully dealing with the corpse, that any semblance of propreity and justice exists. The natural order is preserved, but the only by the element with space for rational thought and self-awareness taking full dominion.

Firstly I would like to acknowledge Dr. Preston as one of my teachers as a young man, whose profound insights and personal actions have had a lasting effect on my own opinions, even in my post-christian times.
I say these nice things because I am about to rip into him.

The social justice movement of the 60's - 80's developed a new aspect of society - critical analysis of the status -quo and a willingness to go outside the status quo ideologically and strategically in order to bring about change. The civil disobedience movements, especially against old Joh in Qld, marked an important step out of the status quo.
But everyone ran back to the status-quo. Noel identifies "live simply so all may simply live" as a key slogan of the time. How many old radicals are living simply today?, who made a real change and who just momentarily echoed the sentiments of the times, but forgot it all over time.

The social justice movements were focused on opinion, ideology and theology and not on real structures of conectedness and political power. This is why everything collapsed, it was just a head trip. For example, Today's queensland police are more violent, aggressive, and racist than in Joh's time. Yet Noel and other leaders of the social justice movement have been lecturing police trainees about social justice for decades - a result of the Fitzgerald inquiriy's reccomendations.. How can this be? The acedemic model of social justice has made real political struggle irrelevant. This is the problem

One of the things Dr. Preston taught me in the late 70's was about "action/reflection". I have not forgotton about this even if others have,

But as long as justice is a personalised concept like prayer or study , the real power brokers will continue to do their thing in the real world unobstructed.

John Tracey

The notion of social justice need no redefining rather simplification.

While it is usefull to attmept to draw into the debate the need for ecological sustainability and stability the term eco-justice just restates the obvious. There are countless examples of how a failure to exercise due enviromental care has harmed the ecology of a region - human and non human; you cant separate the two - the same can be said for forest dwellers being hounded by timber cutters that can be said for the urban poor being priced out of the housing market. There shold not be social justice or eco-justice -

there simply needs to be justice.

Ecology is us. Separating the two makes no sense. We live in and off the environment. Equally we live in and off of each other. The interdependance is undeniable and the so called independance of thought, deed and survival claimed by some individuals is an illusion.

Top post DFXK.
I'm often surprised by eco people who try to play both side of the field. To some how be part of nature but also rise above natural with hollow moralising about our position.
Man is the product of evolution and the very process of evolution kills. Millions of species have been wiped out by animals better able to survive. Much of the eco crowd base their moralising on this false belief that there is a balance in nature. Natural is at best in a state of punctuated equilibrium with many forces shaping the environment and the creatures in it.
Because Social justice is a human construct it is up to individuals to interrupt. AS for a individuals impact on the “natural” environment that is a personnel choice as well. As DFXK say its is the people of the bush that tend to have a practical sense of stewardship mainly because they better understand our position within it. I for my part have solar power, part native tress, revegetate salt damage soil and a few of things.

Many people, including myself, believe that direct experience of the chaotic design of wilderness, and a personal involvement in it, is an important factor in achieving a healthy social conscousness. - going bush or swimming in the sea etc. Living in the bush is the way god created us.

The link between ecology and social justice is not just a philosophical or ideological one (see my above post r.e. ideology). Embracing ecological sensibilities is about expanding human conscousness, not deepening an analysis. A simple understanding that humans are capable of is that everything is connected. But living within this connectedness is a different matter all together. What is it that allows a prison guard to torture a prisoner? - total disconnection from the perspective of the torturer, no empathy, love or concern for the prisoner. Similarly what enables an investor to invest in the uranium industry? - a total disconectedness from the reality of land and communities near uranium mines and nuclear power plants.

Both social justice and ecological healing require a greater connectedness to reality than our present supermarket/t.v. society allows. If we do not feel others pain, or do not see where our pollution goes, then we have no reason to change anything. When we begin to truly hear and see and feel reality, then we have an immediate motivation to protect our own sense of well being.

Social justice and living sustainably within the environment require a holistic consciousness shift.

Social justice people have allways seen the links between justice and the environment, way back in the 60's - 80's too. Today there are many Australians who are very concerned for the environment - everyone is affected by ecocide. But these greenies have too often not seen the links with social justice and perceived the crisis as one that affects their own self interest. Meanwhile poor people around the world are allready dying because of the ecological crises caused by our disconnected lifestyles.

BOAZ_David...........Where are you on this one?

Justice, love, hope, fairness, ... all beautiful words that mean so much or so little depending who are using them and to what end.

The greatest lesson we learnt from the 60s-80s, is to no longer trust our leaders for the outcome of our planet. Social justice is a people movement from the ground up not by a handful of global power players who by the stroke of one signature can change our destiny for ever.

God created man to enjoy and to be in charge of the earth, as a caretaker not in a landlord/ owner position, to manage and not subdue, to cultivate for sustenance and not abuse.

Greed – the result of selfishness – is the thrusting force that controls decision making processes. The losers are always the environment and the poor.

Co-dependency can only succeed if empirical moral guidelines are in place - not laws that can be broken - but ethical reasoning that does not contravene the delicate balance of God's creation.

Unfortunately, socio-ecology today is mostly in the hands of secular humanists who by relying on man-made values are trying to solve man-made problems in a God-made universe.

A holistic approach is required to deal with the complexity of our world ecology and justice. Not including the divine is to work with a blindfold through the scientific maze.

Excluding the creational (God intended) cause and effect of our actions will always bring injustice and pain.

Noel, I liked your article.
It seems that we are not willing to learn from history. Civilisations which have failed to live in a sustainble way and to care for the environment have ceased to exist.
Maybe we are going down this path but this time we are doing it on a global scale.

Coach, I know there is a word-limit, but you seem to be implying that all actions bring injustice and pain.
www.realjustice.org looks at ways of restoring relationship when hurt has been caused, such as by violence or neglect.

Determinism and essentialism are ideologies which lessen our awareness of human freedom, and confine our understanding of humanity to certain inherited or doomed essences. Two very readable philosophers, Isaiah Berlin (then Oxford Professor of Social and Political Theory) and Beata Polanowska-Sygulska (Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Department of the Theory and Philosophy of Law) discuss such things in 'Unfinished Dialogue', a recently published edition of their letters.

Berlin notes that whilst humankind is subject to plural differences, there is a core human quality: “…I believe only that de facto there is sufficient common ground between men at most times and in most places – not, perhaps, always and everywhere – to make understanding and communication and explanation possible.” (p.56)

On page 54 Berlin defends his stance on individual efficacy: “…my unpopular opinion (is) that individuals make more difference to the twists and turns of human history than is commonly supposed by the system-builders…I am prepared to believe that men are to a large degree conditioned by the society into which they are born…by the habits, outlook, way of life, language, beliefs from which they can of course rebel but which nevertheless form and condition the means by which they do so and the set of their minds and emotions and hearts – nevertheless, this is not totally determined: at crucial moments, when conflicts arise within a society, particularly then, the impulse given freely by an individual acting through his won free will and not in some predictable fashion (which some psychologist or sociologist armed with sufficient data could have foretold) can send things spinning in an unforeseen and unforeseeable direction. If Alexander or Caesar had not lived, history would certainly have taken a different turn – this is true of a good many individuals, or perhaps groups of individuals…”

Peace, give us a break! I acknowledge the desperately dry and barren state of the environment in some parts of the world, including our own, but since when has the good-life to be taken for granted?

My sympathies are with a poetic appreciation for the Spirit of God. Jesus likened faithless people to chaff which blows about in the wind, in contrast to stems of reeds firmly alive in the ground, which are flexible enough to bend and bounce-back in the breeze.

Money and mining are twins of the same parent: greed. Let us not be swayed by such fixations, for all their weight on Budget Day.
Neither is heroism or struggle in itself evidence enough of the human spirit. Rather, we belong to the Kingdom of God.

Jesus says the following in the Gospel according to John:
"In all truth I tell you,
no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born
through water and the Spirit;
what is born of human nature is human;
what is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Do not be surprised when I say:
You must be born from above.
The wind blows where it pleases;
you can hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going.
So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."
[John Chapter 3, verses 5-8]

what about social justice for human?
I watched a recent documentary film 'In the shadows of the Palms' and realised the sad and heartbreaking reality of the Iraq War and what it's brought.

Iraq War happened in the shameful name of social/world justice and peace but what has it really brought to the Iraqi people? Freedom? Wellbeing? Democracy?

Democracy brought by force cannot be the complete democracy. 'In the shadows of the Palms' shows effectively how the war affected the normal Iraqi civilians in every possible way before, during and after the attack by Americans and their allies. It is definitely the only documentary on Iraq War that made me cry. It is so real.

The Iraqi people on the streets, at schools and in the tents after they lost the houses made me wonder about the true meaning of the democracy and social justice.

Maybe I should ask Bush - hey what does the social justice means in your dictionary?