Bring Back That 1st R: Refuse
May 13, 2008 by torbjornrive
In the public eye, the first and foremost of the original 1970’s “4 R’s” has been lost, and we are now seeing more of the “3 R’s”: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. Was it for the sake of consumerism, that the Refuse part was dropped? It was no doubt the most radical and important R, and it is apparently replaced with a final “Recover“.
Bring it back. Begin to refuse foremost, because we know when we’re buying too much; especially associated packaging.
The other day at the grocery store I saw 4 packaged apples (<–see a marketing vid.) - and I’m talking ridiculous electronic-devices type packaging. It seems they are part of some ‘phenomenon’ of marketing. “Grapples: Looks like an apple, tastes like a grape”. Absolutely shameful. These things are destined to fail, so please help them do so.
Speaking of consuming - vegans had it right first. They are the best conscious consumers, but are of course the most radical. Doing it for political and environmental reasons was too much ‘back then’. No longer. Original vegans and vegetarians are showing the world that they had it right first.
Refuse. Reduce. Re-use. Recycle.
[...] Variable Interest wrote an interesting post today on Bring Back That 1st R: RefuseHere’s a quick excerpt“Grapples: Looks like an apple, tastes like a grape”. Absolutely shameful….The other day at the grocery store I saw 4 packaged apples (–see a marketing vid…. [...]
Was it really origionally 4 Rs? Wow. My generation doesn’t even know that. Kind of like how my mom’s generation (who would have known that it was once 4 Rs) didn’t know about stop drop and roll. I thought that one was ageless.
that’s right…i was surprised too, so when I read about it in a class reading, I made a memo on notepad to complete that post with that added info.
The article was about environmental work (in this case restoration and habitat enhancement etc) becoming a product, or commodity, and putting all environmental work at danger of becoming a product on human terms, rather than ecological terms. It’s something that I’m sure to touch on as my courses progress.
**and something that I’ve partly touched on before:
http://variableinterest.wordpress.com/2008/05/04/how-the-choice-of-identifying-with-culture-can-be-bad-for-the-environment/
“These things are destined to fail. So please help them do so”…
haha had to laugh at that bit. but otherwise, I too didn’t know it was originally 4 R’s. Is it true? I agree, bring it back.
….it appears to be true to the memory of the author of one of my class readings. I can’t find any evidence of it, except the extra R for ‘recover’ sometimes. In any event, it should come first! thanks for commenting Nabil.
Great to find someone who knows the 4 r’s - a bit harder (and better) to practice than the usual 3!
I look forward to reading your blog.
EJ