Trashed”(common ground vol. VI no. 2) makes a familiar argument. Philip Mangis and Vanessa Moll recite a mantra that not only our generation, but also the two before ours have been learning since grade school. Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. But what “Trashed” makes all too clear is that things are getting worse—the three “R’s” haven’t caught on.

It’s not the wrong end goal; we need a new strategy—something structural. We need to build a broader movement based not only on our trash, but the slew of social ills our landfills represent. It would be a weak movement to overlook the cheaper sweatshops, richer corporations, more repressive governments and more alienated lives that increased consumption both requires and creates. We need to radically rethink how we plan to consume in the future—perhaps designing a zero waste world of renewable energy and technical and biological nutrients. Realistic strategies for this have beenoutlined. Without expanding the movement, environmentalists are in danger of harming communities with whom they should be working in solidarity. The Khon Kaen landfill community, for example, would lose their livelihood if the city of Khon Kaen reduced its trash output without planning for the future with those most affected.Not many structures would withstand the power we’d build as a broader movement. It’s easy to resist the smaller pieces.
Virginia Leavell
Charlottesville, Virginia

The article, “Out of the classroom, into the past,” from the common ground vol. VI no. 2 showed me a side of alternative education that I have never seen in an American context. As a child, I went to a progressive school. It was a wonderful place, with wonderful teachers. After reading this article, however, I realize that my education could have been part of a much larger