The reckless destruction of natural areas in which and by which we live, has advanced in recent years at a rate dangerous. At the same time and place alongside it and the direct or indirect destruction of monuments of culture of centuries has bequeathed to our country. Companies and individuals trying to declarations and theoretical analysis is convincing, what? - For immediate need and an obligation we have to respect and preserve the "natural environment" and our historical monuments.
The intention is undeniably good and commendable, but I fear that is likely to run into figures of speech, though not explored the causes of evil and not reversed by the root.that in many cases, the seizures begin their journey towards a theoretical pursuits aesthetic form . Many believe that what is needed is to enlighten people about the value of space and environment. Sometime in the arsenal of the Enlightenment found no statistical evidence for biological and other effects that can cause change or disaster occurs, is all right.
I think that the cause is at the root of our social structure: I want to say that the reason is the trend of wasteful and uncontrolled private wealth, which has put the sole purpose of achieving material gain. It is very easy to establish the truth. The landscape is transformed: a) the plants they need physical evidence as the first yliV) from industrial plants need the natural elements (sea, rivers, etc.) to relieve the most economical way of redundant industrial materials G ) by companies that build the big hotel D) from any individual who wants to gain the maximum benefit from the space belonging to the property. This can and should be added something very important. And in these four categories have been penetrated and penetrating increasingly intense natural or legal persons not belonging to the national total of our country, which exacerbates the alienation of national assets in multiple Degree.An these factual findings can not be challenged, then resulting consistency with the following conclusions: 1) any "aesthetic" or other treatment can be the cause of evil and no such action can not be a basis for treatment tou2) it is possible to seek to "maximize" (to use the bad financial condition) for the financial gain of an "investment" and is also hindered by factors that antistratefontai.3) It is impossible for the unrestricted pursuit of individual interests do not conflict with the interests of society synolou4) It is impossible to state which must be the political expression of the national total, to control these trends for private gain, when the institutional guarantees and planning to strengthen the belief that underpins and thus promotes economic development topou5) It is impossible to control and limit the wrong with piecemeal measures, and occasionally when there is no overall national program that synthesizes all the data, and economic and cultural, on the basis of the interests of all and this is not short but long practices that go beyond the fleeting duration of genias.Deftero So conclusion from previous findings is that the "problem of environmental protection, etc. etc." is not an aesthetic problem or problem treatment, or even "some" control "some" programming. Is basically a political problem, as political are all foundational problems to be faced by a nation. But even a problem of 'culture' and only if the feature of one, again in the final analysis should reach the respective reduction after just this basic theme is called "Education" is perhaps more than any other issue, policy