THE “NEW ENVIRONMENTALISM†OF THE 1960S

Prior to the 1960s, environmentalisticism was taking two main forms. It is maintenance of conservation of wilderness area protection and resources (wood, deer etc).

• Political activities are directed primarily to laws and regulations relating to natural consumption.

• Several major changes occurred in the 1960s. They all included an understanding of the relationship between environmental and social problems.

First of all, people emphasized the rapid expansion of the use of chemicals after World War II and the announcement of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" (1962).

As a result, the government has increasingly asked for strengthening industry regulations. It also involves raising awareness of the direct relationship between the environment

In addition to praising the beauty of nature, natural writers began to talk more about environmental issues.

Secondly, it is a more comprehensive criticism of the government and society. Spring of Silence exposes, promotes and protects collusion between industry and government

We need to reconsider. We turned our attention to the more ecological center first widely published by John Muir.

Furthermore, as a source of a new world view of nature and its relationship with society, more natural artists are studying other cultures (especially Buddhism and Native American). this

Another source of new social notions is the radical political theory, especially Western anarchism and utopian tradition.

This is consistent with the interest in the alternative society as seen in transcendence and social and political ideals of solo different from traditional society.

The current framework for developing the vision of a new society in harmony with nature is the biological regionalism being promoted by Kentucky Christian farmer Gary Snyder.

Therefore, modern society seems to have already witnessed or has already witnessed a strong "resurgence of the environment" instead of "environmental crisis" (Arias-Maldonado 2013, 17). Undoubtedly, this brief survey gathers various documents and reveals major differences between each discussion. It is not necessarily related to each other in practice, but sometimes it summarizes the arguments based on a very different ideological position. But even though they did not make a single overall story, much of the important ideas in these discussions are not particularly new in fact (Muraca 2013, 147, 150-153), but these The story is very attractive. We are eager to welcome and accept. In fact, the fundamental change in the disorder of the established order seems more urgent than ever, but the old sustainability paradigm can not be exhausted and seems to be unable to show direction.

Since the 1960s, the definition of "new rhetoric" expanded to include various theories and movements, and raised questions about how to understand and apply rhetoric in the 21st century. Three themes appeared when scholars and business leaders gathered at the University of Sydney on September 3, 2005 and talked about "What is a new rhetoric?" Speech is a strong lord with the most invisible physical effect. Holy work: It can stop fear, get rid of sorrow, create happiness, and develop compassion. . . . The sacred spell sung in words is a predator of joy and pain. Because, in the thought of the soul, the power of the spell does not deceive it, persuading it and changing it by magic. (Gorgias 1990, "Encomium", p. 42)

53 "Deep ecology" created by Norwegian philosopher and naturalist Arne Naess is merely an extension of the "artificial Western land use paradigm" of "to protect the wilderness and biodiversity" The reason for sex inevitably appears in human welfare (Nair 1973, citation (Keller, "Gleaning", p.140). As David Keller pointed out, in contrast to the use of value, in contrast , Deep Ecology insists that all living things have intrinsic value, which means that deep ecology is fundamentally non-human (Keller 1997, "Gleaning", p. 140 )