"If, as is natural, you focus on the corruption and on those threatened institutions that are trying to prevent change - even though they don't really know what they're trying to prevent - then you can get pessimistic"
About this Quote
Hawken is diagnosing a particular kind of environmental burnout: the pessimism that comes from staring too long at the machinery of obstruction and mistaking it for the whole story. The line starts with a quiet trapdoor - "as is natural" - acknowledging that fixation on corruption and institutional self-protection isn’t a moral failure so much as a human reflex. Power is loud; it demands our attention. Corruption is legible; it offers villains, paperwork, and outrage. Meanwhile, the slow, distributed work of change rarely reads as "news."
The real bite sits in the parenthetical: institutions "don't really know what they're trying to prevent". Hawken isn’t just calling them cynical; he’s calling them incoherent. That’s a sharper critique than saying they’re evil. It suggests that the defense of the status quo is often automatic, a bureaucratic immune response: reject the unfamiliar, delay the messy, protect the existing revenue streams, repeat. If the guardians can’t articulate the threat, the fight is less a debate than a reflexive flinch.
Context matters: Hawken has spent decades arguing that environmental progress is driven by networks of citizens, entrepreneurs, and local movements rather than by heroic top-down reform. His intent here is tactical. He’s warning that attention is a resource, and where you spend it shapes your emotional weather. Pessimism, in this framing, isn’t insight; it’s an attention economy problem. The subtext is a nudge toward a different focal length: zoom out from corruption-as-spectacle and you start noticing momentum, experimentation, and the ordinary persistence that institutions can’t quite name, much less stop.
The real bite sits in the parenthetical: institutions "don't really know what they're trying to prevent". Hawken isn’t just calling them cynical; he’s calling them incoherent. That’s a sharper critique than saying they’re evil. It suggests that the defense of the status quo is often automatic, a bureaucratic immune response: reject the unfamiliar, delay the messy, protect the existing revenue streams, repeat. If the guardians can’t articulate the threat, the fight is less a debate than a reflexive flinch.
Context matters: Hawken has spent decades arguing that environmental progress is driven by networks of citizens, entrepreneurs, and local movements rather than by heroic top-down reform. His intent here is tactical. He’s warning that attention is a resource, and where you spend it shapes your emotional weather. Pessimism, in this framing, isn’t insight; it’s an attention economy problem. The subtext is a nudge toward a different focal length: zoom out from corruption-as-spectacle and you start noticing momentum, experimentation, and the ordinary persistence that institutions can’t quite name, much less stop.
Quote Details
| Topic | Change |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Paul
Add to List






