Before we go into the main topic, which centers around a lawsuit brought against the administration by a group of young people, I want to speak briefly about the somewhat widespread animosity by liberals and The Left against the current president.
As I have said before, there are many reasons why liberals and progressives are furious with the president. Some are so angry that they refuse to give him his official title, and prefer to refer to him as 45. There are numerous offensive cartoons about him and his actions, and his choices for secretaries of the various sections within government, and millions across the country are seething. Millions, of course, have seethed against the presidents we've supported; conservatives have hated Obamacare, and to date it is something that unites the conservatives in hatred, though a few of them recognize that it is not only a difficult law to improve upon, it is the most business-friendly Healthcare reform possible. Millions have hated other legislation Obama supported. They hated the fact that he appointed Hillary Clinton, and that he supported her against many accusations of misconduct by Republican party members in and out of government. Millions hated the bailout of Wall Street banks, and Millions more--some of them Democrats--hated that Obama bailed out the car companies.
But our hate is more reasonable! (I say that in jest.) But when we condemn, we must not stoop to insult. Some of the late night comedians whom I admire are quite brutal in their onslaught against 45; of course, they're comedians, and provided they stop short of sexual harassment (something that brought Al Frankel down, to our dismay,) we can tolerate their viciousness as a necessary safety-valve. But we should stop short of all of us trying to be safety-valves by demeaning the . . . demeaning 45. Don't demean. Vote. Okay? Thanks.What we're seeing related to Climate Change
So far, here are some of the effects that Climate Change has resulted in:
1. Extreme weather events, such as hurricanes. These consequences would have taken place regardless of whether the warming of the environment was caused, or even hastened, by man. So if anyone resists talking or thinking about the connection between Climate Change and extreme weather events simply from being defensive about human culpability, they should knock it off. The warming environment is certainly the source of these events.
2. Temperature extremes, e.g. hotter, dryer weather in the Northwest, cooler, wetter weather in the Northeast, which encourages major wildfires in the Northwest, and flooding in the East. The chain of causes here is more subtle, but scientists are persuaded about the cause.
3. Ocean Temperatures rising. This makes it impossible for certain creatures to flourish in the oceans. These creatures feed small fish, and the smaller fish are food for certain very popular sorts of ocean fish, eaten both by Westerners, and on which smaller Third World countries also depend for food. In addition, the Oceans are getting dirtier, because warmer water washing into rivers and oceans bring more grime. Warm water also encourages bad sorts of algae.
4. Ocean Levels are rising. Typically, people who live close to the sea are financially disadvantaged, and already, when ocean levels rise for temporary reasons, such as a storm surge, it is poor people who lose their homes, and become refugees. This is part of the reason why Climate Change is a Social Justice issue. As ocean levels continue to rise, people will continue to be displaced.
5. Farmland is being turned into desert. The implications are obvious. Of course, certain economic policies are not helping.
6. The habitats of polar species are being destroyed. This doesn't directly impact humans, but many of use consider the diversity of species as a part of our quality of life, at least in an intangible way.
That provides a backdrop to our discussion. Bear in mind that, as conditions deteriorate further, more extreme and surprising consequences will impinge on us, but it is not necessary--yet--to draw attention to those more extreme results of Warming.
From The Perspective of Youth
Recently, a certain lawsuit, which is called Juliana, has drawn attention in the news. The suit, brought by a number of young people against the Trump Administration, charges that the plaintiffs
... risk being deprived of their “rights to life, liberty, property, and public trust resources by federal government acts that knowingly destroy, endanger, and impair the unalienable climate system that nature endows."As I understand it, they're accusing the Federal Government of putting at risk their ability to enjoy the usual pursuits of happiness, etc, enshrined in the constitution, by its careless actions.
We might agree with the point of view of the plaintiffs, even if we do not agree with the legal path they have taken. (My own point of view is sympathetic to the young people, though I do not take it carelessly.) By the time those who voted in the 2016 election are safely dead, the plaintiffs in this case, who are presently about the age of 20, are going to be deeply involved in the suffering that has been brought on not only generally, because of global warming, but specifically, because of the actions of the present administration.
Normally, a government cannot be hampered by the threat of lawsuits, particularly for actions conducted in good faith for the good of the populace. But are the environmental actions of the present government in good faith? Good faith with respect to whom? Can we equate the benefit of various business interests with the benefit of the people at large? Can we blame government foolishness on mere ignorance and wishful thinking, rather than malice?
From where we stand, of course, it looks malicious. But it may, in fact, have been the Administration being kind and generous towards certain businesses, and firm and stern towards nature, and the tree-huggers that conservatives have despised for decades.
If the plaintiffs can prove that the government actions of the recent past were malicious and negligent, then at least certain parts of the demands of the plaintiffs ought to be allowed.
Environment Austerity
As I wrote in the previous post, acting in an environmentally responsible way could be considered inconvenient, and a nuisance. You have to balance that against the hardship that being irresponsible will cause for many, mostly the poor and uneducated. Bear in mind that some of the potential victims of our irresponsibility might themselves be far more irresponsible than we are! (Isn't that always the way it goes ...)
* Minimize sending hot water down the sink, or into the sewer. Minimize using water at all. (I must confess that I use a heck of a lot of water, but I try hard to reduce it.)
* Minimize using air conditioning. Apparently this is a huge factor in Warming. In fact, using air conditioning makes it necessary for our neighbors to use air conditioning also.
* Spay and Neuter pets. Pets place a burden on the environment. Make no mistake: I love our pets, and I love everybody else's pets, too. But some folks are irresponsible, and as soon as it becomes difficult to deal with their pets, they abandon them. Some folks take them out to wooded areas, and throw them out; some give the pets to people who are clearly ill-equipped to take them. Do not construe my remarks to mean that only wealthy pet-owners should be allowed. Pet ownership involves patience and work, and yes, a degree of expense, especially since veterinary services are not free. Much of this is avoided if pets are spayed and / or neutered, as appropriate.
* Minimize the use of grills. Some people enjoy grilling their food more than almost anything else. Ideally, we ought to give up grilling altogether, to make a maximum reduction on our environment impact. But if everyone halved their use of grilling, that alone would be enormous, until the time comes, of course, when matters become desperate.
* Use Public Transport! Greta Thunberg avoids use of motor-powered transportation almost entirely, but at the very least, we can travel by bus (or train) whenever possible. For parents with young children, I recommend this highly; kids are far more likely to consider bus travel as adults, if they have experienced it as children, especially in the company of their parents. In some places, bus travel is considered dangerous. All the more reason to travel by bus. We do not need to encourage unpleasant people and layabouts to take ownership of public transport. Personal transport is the single biggest source of unwanted heat and Carbon Dioxide.
All environmentalists end their litanies of things to do with the exhortation: Don't go it alone! Drag your friends with you!
Arch
No comments:
Post a Comment