I'm a big fan of Al Gore, Laurie David, Sheryl Crow, George Clooney, Bono, one.org, etc. who are doing what they feel they must to make a difference. Gore and David's movie (An Inconvenient Truth) created a tipping point for global warming; David and Crow toured colleges in the U.S. to raise environmental awareness; Clooney quietly visited Beijing with Don Cheadle to discuss Darfur with the CPC; Bono accepted an editor position at Vanity Fair to push stories on Africa and world poverty. I lived in Ghana for two years--half of the time in villages, living three days a week with electricity and drawing my water from a well. Every African social issue appeals to me, and admire anyone who turns their sympathies there.

I believe these celebrities are sincere in their efforts, and reject the notion that they are simply jumping on a bandwagon. Humanitarian progress has always been supported first by artists, then the public, then governments. Some might say these events are all razzle-dazzle and do not do enough to translate awareness into action. I disagree. Just as Moses had to lead the Israelites around for 40 years, it generally takes a generation for things to turn. Even if these celebrities were disingenuous in their motives, it all serves to tip things in the right direction. I wish more venue-packing celebrities would get involved.

I remember reading about Live Earth earlier this year, and supported the cause. But I lost track. Work consumes me. I work hard, seven days a week, and eventually had to turn all my RSS feeds off in order to concentrate and get things done. (Sometimes we're all just a little too connected.) I would not have traveled to Shanghai for the concert, but I would have attended in Beijing had the concert come here.

Two books tipped me: "The Future of Life" by E. O. Wilson, and "Beyond Culture," by Edward Hall. I believe that the roots of environmental destruction are culural and psychological. As Hall argues:

"There are two related crises in today's world. The first and most visible is the population/environmental crisis. The second, more subtle but equally lethal, is humankind's relationships to its extensions, institutions, and ideas, as well as the relationships among the many individuals and groups that inhabit the globe. If both crises are not resolved, neither will be. Despite our faith in technology and our reliance on technological solutions, there are no technical solutions to most of the problems confronting human beings. Furthermore, even those technical solutions that can be applied to environmental problems can't be applied rationally until humankind transcends the intellectual limitations imposed by our institutions, our philosophies, and our cultures. Compounding all of this is the realty of politics."

Or as R World blogger, Ron Davison, states:

"We simply won't be able to address the problem of climate change (or any of a number of other problems) without first changing our operating system."

There are plenty of good books, movies, and websites informing us that the sky is falling, and there are plenty of credible science reports to back them all up. And while there are plenty of top ten lists offering solutions of what one can do to prevent or postpone catastrophe (drive less, recycle more, plant a tree), there seems to be a dearth of plausible, practical systems of mass implementation.

Various groups will tell you that the problem lies in government, capitalism, free trade, public education, "the man," God, Satan. Few, however, are attacking environmental destruction where it begins: unconscious, eco-aggressive patterns in the mind. Without a clear understanding of the social/psychological roots of environmental destruction, or an effective method for change, humans will continue to drive more, recycle less, and cut down trees.

A global tipping point is in order—a worldwide eco-friendly marketing epidemic. Nothing shy of brainwashing the entire human populace (or a large enough chunk to make a difference) is going to make a difference. Events like Live Earth push us in the right direction, however "trendy" they may seem in the eyes of the anti-bandwagon backlash.