Page 68 [68]
66 | THe Puitosopny or Eco-Pouirics
societies is based on the application of technologies of social organisation
and transformation of nature which effectively direct people’s behaviour
independently of their individual convictions and choices. The individual
can only really choose between cooperation — the acceptance of the logic
of the system — and complete rejection. Exiting society, however,
requires sacrifices such as very few are willing to make. ‘The rest of us,
as beneficiaries of this system, share in the aforementioned sins: the
destruction of the natural (and cultural) conditions of a life worthy of
man. ‘This sinful behaviour can be unintentional from our part, the poor
choice can be impersonal and automatic and the connection between
act and consequences can be impenetrably complicated, but all this does
not change the fact that the individual bears responsibility for his own
actions and cannot henceforth pass it on to anyone else. We are
responsible for what, strictly speaking, we “cannot help”.
What should I do (me, personally), in the knowledge of my
responsibility for the preservation of the conditions worthy of human
life? Thoreau’s axiomatic observation still holds true regarding the
responsibility of civil disobedience: “It is not a man’s duty, as a matter
of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most
enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage
him; but it is his duty at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives
it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support.””* But how
can we satisfy this requirement? How could I refuse cooperation with
the sinful structures, if without them I cannot fulfil my basic duties,
such as taking care of my descendants or even acquiring the knowledge
needed for telling between right and wrong?
The thinkers of the Enlightenment tied man’s ethical dignity to the
freedom of conscience, to which he is in all circumstances entitled. They
hoped that the conditions of an autonomous moral existence would be
created for everyone by the scientific-technological achievements getting
the upper hand over natural necessity and by a political system that eases
social pressure to the point of being tolerable. Later developments did
not meet their expectations. The new technologies in service of mass
production and the organisational and communicative procedures
enabling their application created a closed system. Its operation requires
strict conformity from the members of society in all areas of life and
renders the autonomy of the individual illusory. If possible, the total
288 Henry David Thoreau: On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, p.10. Libertas Institute, Salt
Lake City UT, 2014.