He is proven that the countries that contaminate more are richest and later poorest. The first for being most powerful, and to want to continue being it, they prioritize the economic development by on the care of the ecology – primary target is to make money, and everything is subordinated it, the concessions are only made to the benefit of majors gains. The seconds, the poor countries, do not have resources, or have resources that are used by the rich countries. Therefore, they generate the energy that needs through the precarious forms that are their reach, which do not agree generally with ecological criteria (burning fire of trees or coal use of vegetal origin, hunts indiscriminate, and all derived problems). Of this two things can be deduced: 1 – When not having resources, of money, it is not had the necessary education, but mainly, of the RESOURCES necessary to avoid any type of evil.
2 – When having resources, of money, it is not necessarily had education sufficient to avoid no type of evil. What determines as is acted before the problems, before the evils, and how it is acted generally it is not the education level (although this it is an important factor) but the values that the society at issue prioritizes. If most important it is the money, this means that the education (the society) foments direct or indirectly this valuation of the world. In this case, she herself contributes to cause the ecological problems. Therefore, the solution of the environmental problems and any other can be an education question.
But most important it is than this depends on CERTAIN education, supported in determined it brings back to consciousness and values that are not opposite to the effects that are persecuted. All the others are fashionable question, hypocrisy and image, that surpass to the concrete actions. It is very easy to criticize, mainly when it is spoken to speak, when it is cried by the evils of the world without considering other aspects. It is even very easy to criticize knowing than it is spoken, but no doing nothing on the matter. Speaking of other people’s (always the one is another one that is the guilty), lamenting itself of how others are the guilty of all the had problems and to have. The ecology, by all means, is not besides this cancer of own hypocrisy of the human societies. Original author and source of the article.