I’ve lost track of the number of people who tell me to read George Monbiot’s books and columns because “he has many of the answers” to climate change, over-consumption, consumer capitalism, and corporate imperialism.
In fact, I’ve actually read a couple of his books, most recently Heat, and dip into his columns for the Guardian from time to time.
I agree that Monbiot does challenge orthodoxies, does put forward some ingenious ideas and does make some good arguments based on solid research, but overall I’m left with the feeling that he’s just another naive middle-class professional playing at “doing good”.
His most recent column, in today’s Guardian, is an excellent example of his inability to step outside the south-east centric, middle-class box, to examine the real causes of social, economic and environmental injustices, and to come up with genuine solutions.
Monbiot’s latest column looks at the plight of the very poor in Britain and how badly they are served by our social housing.
He spends almost the entire length of the piece, about 1,000 words out of 1,200, exploring the plight of poor families who are living in genuinely appalling conditions.
We’re told about families of five and six people living in rundown two-bedroom flats in London, with little or no chance of being rehoused somewhere more suitable to their needs.
Monbiot then concludes, without so much as a single argument, that he finds himself “supporting the preposterous housing target (i.e. to build 3 million new homes by 2020).
“There is a legitimate debate to be had about where and how these homes are built. However - though it hooks in my green guts to admit it - built they must be.”
Why?
It’s a pity he didn’t spend more time considering his green guts because he could and should have reached a very different conclusion.
The plight of Monbiot’s case studies will not be eased by millions of new houses, most of which will turn out to be three, four and five-bedroom “executive” houses on vast estates carved out of green-field land.
The flats occupied by his case studies will still be there in five years, 10 years and even 20 years, and they will continue to be inhabited by the poor and disenfranchised.
Meanwhile, those large, new-build houses with their double garages, handkerchief lawns and wasteful designs will be occupied by two or three-person households with access to seemingly unlimited credit.
At the same time, Britain’s burgeoning population will increase demand still further and the Government will rapidly revise its target of three million new homes in 12 years to higher and higher figures.
After all, that’s how Britain’s consumer economy has to be maintained and perpetuated.
It needs continual growth, which means more people with every increasing incomes to buy all the trappings of a selfish, individualistic society - including ever larger and more ostentatious houses.
Monbiot’s pliant acquiescence with the Government’s policy is symptomatic of this.
He’s hardly likely to ask if he and his family are living in a house that’s genuinely appropriate to their needs, nor is he likely to suggest that they could live somewhere smaller so a larger family could live in his house.
Monbiot is a middle-class professional after all, with an image and standards to maintain so he has to have a house that says something about him, his family, their aspirations and their position.
It may have some environmentally friendly improvements, but it’s going to remain in a middle-class area with good facilities and the right image.
It’s a scenario repeated around the country.
Depending on which type of middle-class or affluent image people aspire too, they will be living in the largest house in the most desirable area their income and level of credit can support.
They’re not going to live in a generously sized eco-flat with good communal facilities where cycling and walking are emphasised over the car.
They’re not going to live in a modern, resource efficient row of terraces with a single bathroom, a kitchen that’s no bigger than their actual needs, and no off-street parking.
They’re not going to live in one of the 420,000 disused commercial properties that could be converted into housing, in many cases providing homes that are right next to shops and places of work.
No, they want a large new build, a transformed period house, or a large barn/steading conversion that says “I have arrived, I have wealth and I am important”.
And even better if they can have two houses. One to live in, and one to holiday in for two or three weeks a year.
Monbiot could have suggested the Government should discourage the wasteful modern house on its soulless estate. He didn’t.
He could have suggested the Government change planning policy from individual centric to community centric. He didn’t.
He could have suggested using the tax system and other methods to discourage wasteful housing occupation. He didn’t.
Monbiot could have suggested methods for discouraging second home ownership. He didn’t.
He could have suggested bringing some of the estimated 870,000 empty homes in the UK back into use. He didn’t.
Mobiot could have suggested converting empty commercial properties to create 420,000 new homes. He didn’t.
He could have suggested it’s time for serious discussion about how many people the British isles can sustainably support. He didn’t.
He could have suggested population management as a way of decreasing demand for housing. He didn’t.
He could have suggested that before the Government even thinks about more houses it should be asking if Britain has reached or exceeded its sustainable capacities for land, water, food, energy, agriculture, minerals, waste, etc.
Once again Monbiot has shown that when it comes to tackling middle-class affluenza and its trail of destruction, middle-class environmentalists do not have the motivation to suggest, initiate and carry through meaningful change.
They will just shrug and say, “Sorry, I’m not comfortable with having so much and it hurts me to say it, but we just have to accept that’s the way things need to be”.
[...] flash new car is not enough, it has to changed for a better one every year. A big house is not enough, it has to be swapped for a bigger one every few [...]