The November 15, 2007 40th Anniversary issue of Rolling Stone Magazine (pg 54)contains an interview of Al Gore on serious questions of where we are going as a country and a planet. The interview took place at Gore's Nashville home two days after the October 12 Nobel Peace Prize announcement. While he seems to be more clear than before that he is not running, his answers leave a glimmer of hope for 2008... I think the chances are low, and I may be going crazy, but I still think something does not quite add up. This diary is long, and for that I apologize.
Gore begins stating the climate crisis is:
"It's the issue. Everything else has to be viewed through that lens."
Many Gore hopefuls have asked that since the climate crisis is so urgent and crucial for us to act immediately, then how can Al not run? Well, Gore does understand what is at stake, and argues passionately,
"The climate crisis must be seen as pre-eminent, because it is necessary for us to safeguard the ecological basis for human civilization. The newest evidence shows that unless we act boldly and urgently, the entire north polar ice cap could be completely gone in one generation - less than 22 years.... Everytime you immerse yourself in the core research data, you come back with the conclusion 'Oh my god, it's even worse than I thought."
The problem is critical. The data is getting worse. In fact, it is worse than the upper-band predictions that scientists have made. Oh my god, says Al. Does Gore trust that Hillary or Giuliani will act boldly and urgently?
But does Al worry that it may be too late?
"No, it is not yet too late, we have time. We don't have much time, but we do have time."
Al says we don't have much time. It has been said we have as little as 7-10 years to make significant changes, and that was before recent data has come back showing the problem to be worse than predicted. So assume we have 5-10 years to really make bold, radical changes.
Rolling Stone asks how we engineer the sweeping social and political and industrial change that we need in a short period of time, from top to bottom? In other words, within the next 5-10 years, how do we radically transform our society to solve this crisis? Gore's answer:
"Einstein once said, 'the problems that face us cannot be solved at the same level of consciousness that created them. What we need is a shift in consciousness."
To be able to succeed in transforming our society to solve the crisis, we first need a change in human consciousness. The interviewer follows asking How do we get to this shift in consciousness, and Gore describes the change in consciousness as a Kuhnian paradigm shift, and says that we are "right now" on the cusp of it...
So I have to ask is the cusp that we are on right now at the end of November, or more like 4 or 5 years away? He says,
"When enough unexplainable new phenomena pile up, there is sometimes a shift in consciousness that moves us quickly and suddenly to recognize a new pattern that explains all of these things that have been mysterious in the context of the old way of thinking. That's what we're on the cusp of right now."
Hmm. He did say "right now" as opposed to simply "now". Does the "right" before "now" imply the paradigm shift is within this current election cycle, or several years off still? He also said it could occur quickly and suddenly. Like without any prior warning? Please Al make the shift occur this month while there is still time for it to matter!
Regarding the inability of Congress to pass effective climate crisis legislation:
"The reason they go nowhere is that public opinion has not yet changed, because the shift in consciousness has not yet occurred. But the new way of thinking will soon reach a critical mass - and when it does, you're going to see a flip."
OK, got it. We are "right now" on the cusp, but the shift has "not yet" occurred. But it will happen "soon".
Al, if you unexpectedly and suddenly announced for President and made Climate crisis the prism through which your entire campaign and all other issues flowed, could that not in itself tip us over the cusp that we are right now on, ushering in the paradigm shift that has not yet occurred, but will soon, allowing the conditions for the radical changes that are required for the next US president?
Here is a side note on the possibility of Gore practicing civil disobedience to stop the construction of new coal fired power plants. Gore endorses the idea and predicts we will see it:
"You're also going to see people practicing civil disobedience, lying in front of bulldozers and the dump trucks to physically prevent the building of any new coal-fired plants."
This indicates he may be seriously considering the offer made by Rain Forest Action Network.
While overall defending the Democratic leadership in Congress, he does criticize the large group of Democrats who vote the interest of their corporate donors, but argues that it is up to the people to change it,
..."But that's the way our system works, and it's up to we the people, forgive the cliche, to redouble our passion for the kind of change that's needed."
To all of us who have sweated and worked, pondered and imagined, and donated, for the future reality that involves Al Gore as President in 2008, we all feel that we have redoubled our passion for the change that's needed. The change needed is Al Gore, at least we thought and hoped. He would be the leader to clean up the swamp and restore our democracy, in partnership with the grassroots American people, us the wind at his back.
Gore knows the potential of the 2008 election too. He knows the Republicans are in trouble. He knows there could be a tidal wave of historic proportions, and he predicts the Democrats may have a 60 seat majority in the Senate to stop the Republican filibuster attempts. He says,
"The way this election is trending, we have an excellent chance of getting those 60 votes. We've had Republican incumbent after Republican incumbent announcing retirement in the face of what is clearly shaping up as a tidal wave of disgust and rejection of the unprecedented arrogance and failures of the ideology that has created such destruction for the American landscape. The wind is at our backs - make no mistake about that. If we keep our wits about us, we have a chance in this election to really bring about historic change"
Got it, but just one question, Al... Don't you think it would be best if you were President to make sure this historic change actually happens, or if you think Hillary's got it covered, then OK.
When asked what the Democratic party should stand for right now, Gore argues for the principles that he cares most deeply about.
"First and foremost, a definitive solution to the climate crisis. I say with disappointment, they're nowhere close to that right now, but I think they will get there. I know it sounds unrealistic right now, but there's going to be a grassroots uprising that results in the climate crisis rising to the top of the agenda."
This is interesting. The Democratic party should, right now, first and foremost stand for solving the climate crisis. He say's they are nowhere close right now but they will get there. When and Who? The current candidates, in this cycle? Or, hypothetical future candidates somewhere down the road when the shift in thinking, which we are on the cusp of right now, actually does occur? Then Al predicts a grassroots uprising to push the climate crisis to the top of the agenda, which will occur no doubt when the change in consciousness occurs. Will this push to the top of the agenda occur in this election cycle? After all, the question asked what we should stand for right now. Or, does Al think that it will rise to the agenda in 2012 or 2016?
Well, when asked what should be the agenda of the next President, he describes doing all the things that must be done once the shift occurs. So if the next President is supposed to do these things and make them the top of the agenda, has the shift occurred already? The shift must occur either before Hillary (or whoever is President) is sworn in, or sometime in her first term so she can re-organize her entire presidency to make climate crisis the central prism. Imagine... Hillary can re-organize her Presidency at some time in 2010, once Gore has been successful as a private citizen in tipping us over the cusp that we are on right now in 2007. If he thinks the next President will have the tools and power of solving the crisis while leading in a post paradigm shift political environment, then why would Al not want to be President at that time, since he has stated he would like to be President once the paradigm shift occurs?
Still responding to the question about the agenda of the next US president, Al says,
"With the United States leading the entire world community toward a new era of sharply reduced global warming pollution, we will see a transformation of our civilization in a way that makes it possible for us, like the World War II generation, to see other moral imperatives we wave to undertake..."
So Gore predicts that the next US President, most likely Hillary Clinton I suppose, will lead the entire world community in sharply reducing C02. Al, has Hillary promised to do any of that? Transforming society so radically by taking on the special interests may not be at the top of Hillary's list.
Gore gives advice to any potential candidate,
"Go into it. Use the internet. Focus on authentic, passionate communication of exactly what you believe, and wait for people to come to it."
You mean like the three shorts you put up on Current.com outlining your reasonable and passionate positions on the Iraq War, government eavesdropping, and health care?
On the question of what does it take to get good leadership, Gore says,
"A change in consciousness."
Wait a sec here... Now you are saying that we can not have good leadership until we have a change in consciousness first? But... before you were saying the Democratic party should lead on this right now, and that the next US President could successfully transform society. So does that mean Hillary's leadership will start out as poor, until the paradigm shift occurs sometime in her first term, at which point her leadership will become good? Or, will the change of consciousness occur early enough in this election cycle, so that Gore can enter and make sure we have good leadership?
On how his perspective on politics has changed since he left office, Gore says,
"What politics has become requires a tolerance for triviality and artifice and nonsense that I personally find I have in short supply. That's not to say at some point in the future I might not see a situation that convinced me it was worthwhile to get involved in politics again. But that's extremely unlikely. I keep that caveat in place, by the way, not to be coy, and not to signal to anybody that I'm thinking about doing it. I'm just being honest. I'm only fifty nine years old - and fifty nine is the new fifty-eight."
Ouch. But at this point we know its extremely unlikely. But it is still possible, even this cycle. After all Roy Neel, defined future as sometime after today, or something to that effect.
Does he feel sad or guilty about saying no to the Presidency that looks like it is his to win:
Gore replies:
"No. Not at all."
So Gore would not hesitate to say no, but that does not mean he will not say yes.
Many Gore supporters feel the unique moment in time demands Gore to run, right now, in 2008! Gore seems to acknowledge that viewpoint but dismisses it.
"Well, I understand that point of view. But I personally don't feel as if I have to apologize for devoting so much of my life to a different kind of campaign to bring about a change in consciousness and an elevated sense of urgency about solving the climate crisis... I'm working around the world to bring about this change in thinking."
On the role of the President, Gore acknowledges the influence and power, but basically says that his talents are best used right now in creating the shift on consciousness. If he does that, then he would like to be President. He says we are not there yet, but we know we are on the cusp right now. Still, if we are right now on the cusp, does he want to wait 8 years for Hillary to complete her presidency to run for president himself?
He says,
"I fully understand and appreciate the point of view that there really is no position in the world with as much potential impact and influence as that of the President of the United States, and I totally respect that. But I'm not sure that the highest and best use of whatever talents and experiences I've gained isn't best focused on solving the climate crisis and, instead of doing all of the many things that a candidate for President has to do."
Ok. The climate crisis is the biggest threat facing humankind in our history, threatening the future habitability of the planet for human civilization, Gore knows the most about it, he knows the POTUS is the best position to effect change, knows we have 5-10 years to act... but, he feels as though his talents are best used creating this shift in thinking rather than doing candidate type things, which he could minimize through his internet based grassroots campaign. He continues,
"I think its conceivable that a President of the United States could redesign every challenge as something that needs to be seen through the prism of solving the climate crisis, and in that way, rally the nation and the world to rise to solve this existential crisis. But I don't think our country or the world are at that point right now. Some countries are farther along than we are, and I think we'll get there, but we're not there yet."
But he said he wants the next President of the US lead on this and succeed. So when are we going to be there? Does it happen after Bali in December? That's probably too late. What could be the impetus for a late November announcement?
There is a confusing exchange where I was confused by Gore's second response. Here is the brief exchange,
Q: You don't think that if you stepped into it and crusaded on the subject, that it would be enough to elect you?
Answer: "Well, I don't even get to the point where I analyze the political instrumentality of it."
Q: That being your passion, that being what you want to accomplish, that moment is not at hand?
Answer: "That's different from what I said. I just don't think I can say that's the best of use of the talents I have right now."
So although it looks like Gore is not running, he goes on to address three common critiques of a potential Gore campaign:
Number 1: If he entered the race, the campaign would distract him away from his climate change mission. Gore's answer:
"...I've lived long enough to know that I wouldn't be distracted. I would do this regardless. But my job is to create the condition to make that a strategy that succeeds. And I don't think we're at that point yet."
So if he entered he would make climate crisis the number one issue, he would not be distracted, but first he needs to create the shift, which we are right now on the cusp of, so that his campaign would succeed.
He then goes on to criticize the current candidates' climate crisis platforms as woefully inadequate for what is required:
"The current Presidential candidates call me from time to time. 'Al, do you have any advice on how I could tweak my position on the climate crisis?' I always respond. 'Look, we're way beyond tweaking - we have to have fundamental change. We ought to eliminate the payroll tax and replace it with a C02 tax. We ought to have a complete ban on any new coal fired generating plants. We ought to have a full investment tax credit for all advanced solar thermal power plants, which could supply most of the electricity this country needs. We ought to change the utility laws so that every person and business in the United States can install photovoltaic panels and small windmills and sell unused limited quantities of electricity into the grid."
So that is what is needed. Al Gore lays out a platform that is more than mere tweaking of the positions of the current crop of candidates.
Q: And you don't think its doable really? Answer: "The only way it will become doable is if I and others continue to plow and plant and cultivate the political environment to where it becomes possible. if that means that I see it over the horizon and somebody else gets there and I don't, then I would still feel, under those circumstances, that I had lived a useful life. Do I rule out the possibility that a set of conditions emerges before I'm too old to still be a leader capable of making hourly decisions in a crisp and effective way? No, I don't think it's impossible. Look, am content that I am doing what I ought to be doing. In terms of my career path, I'm doing what feels like the right thing to do right now."
Gore is deflecting with this answer. The issue for all of us Gore fans is not whether he would ever run in the future, but whether he would run under any circumstances in 2008. He could easily issue a Shermanesque statement for 2008 but leave the door open for a future run in a future cycle.
A second common critique of a potential Gore run is that he will not enter because he fears losing, and would not be able to handle defeat again.
"No. Look, the fear of defeat holds no terror for me whatsoever."
Unequivocally shot that meme down.
Third, maybe the hectic travel schedule and the demands of campaigning are keeping him out. Gore volunteers this information:
"The burden of staying in Holiday Inns and traveling all the time and making speeches all the time is not something that is a factor"
Asked directly about what he says to those for whom he remains a vessel for their hopes? And let me add, he is a vessel for our hopes right now, in the 2008 election, not in 2012 or 2016. So the question is what does he say to us who are hoping he runs this election? He answers:
"Well, thank you for feeling that way about me. Please trust me to make good decisions about where I can do the most good, and don't automatically assume that running for President again is the right thing for me to do. If you feel that way and I decide for sure not to be a candidate again - well, sorry. If I do get back involved in the political system at some point in the future - well, keep that energy stored up and let's have a go at it then."
He answers to trust him, that he will make good decisions about how to be most effective, and to not assume that it is necessarily to run for President. But that does not mean the best use is not to run for president. And when he says some point in the future, is he ruling out 2008? Is he referring to the distant future, or is the door open for this cycle? Can the shift in consciousness that is required for him to consider a run possible, occur so quickly, so unexpectedly?
He then says how he would run, if he were to run, at some point in the future, of course.
"I would try to use the internet to mobilize millions of people at the grassroots level, and I think that's coming. As i said earlier, we have the wind at our backs. This is going to be the American century, we're going to come back strong."
Earlier, he specifically said we had the winds at our backs in this particular election cycle, 2008, and would have a tidal wave of gains. When he says "he thinks its coming", does he mean what he says, that he himself will use the internet to mobilize millions? Or, just that some hypothetical candidate will at some point in the future? Why would he launch current.com now in 2007 and create the framework himself for some future candidate's success?
It's all about timing. On the surface, his answers indicate he will sit this one out, and wait for his chance in 2012 or 2016. But then he says the time for change is urgent, immediate, and we are on the cusp, etc. When looking back from the future to the current time, he points to the year 2007 in some interviews as the turning point, in others the beginning of the 21st century. But he doesn't say we can wait until 2012 or 2016.
In the climate crisis slideshow that he presents, Gore ends by saying that in a few decades those living will look back and ask themselves one of two questions: basically, how did they solve the crisis, or why did they fail? The last question in the Rolling Stone interview is how this time will be remembered 40 years from now, and Gore's answer shows his optimism and prediction of success in solving the climate crisis. Gore predicts the question 40 years from now will be:
"How did they find the moral courage to change the pattern of history, to break through to a new way of thinking about the place of human beings on this planet, and successfully solve a crisis on a planetary scale that so many people were telling them was impossible to solve? How did they break free of the political sclerosis and spiritual catatonia that paralyzed them for decades and quickly realize that the survival of human civilization was at stake? How did they then, with great imagination, creativity, and spiritual courage, put in place sweeping reforms that saved the ecological basis for human civilization, restored the balance essential for human survival and lay the foundation for the rewarding and beautiful civilization that we enjoy here in the future."
Come on... this requires Al. Admit it. Break free of political sclerosis and spiritual catatonia? Hillary? You think? Obama? Hmm.
No offense to any of the Democratic candidates, but I think only Edwards has the potential to break free of political sclerosis... but can we count on his chances of beating Hillary?
Time is late. It is November 3, 2007. The NH filing deadline has passed, and if Al does enter, NH will have to rely on a write in campaign. The last reasonable chance, barring a brokered convention, is for Gore to enter before the Super Tuesday filing deadlines. The longer he waits the less likely it is.
On the surface his statements seem to indicate he would consider a run in 2012 or 2016, but not 2008, although he never says so explicitly. He still does not completely rule out a 2008 run. Why not? I think the chances are very low at this point, but I still think everything that has occurred to lead to this point demands that Al Gore run and enter the race. And as Tipper said in the Vanity Fair article, that if he woke up one morning and decided he had to run to help spur the shift in consciousness, she would be ready to fight by his side. So would we. And so would the rest of America. And so would the World. And all future generations will thank us.
Al, I think you can be most effective as President. I think you can be most effective at first creating the shift in consciousness during your campaign for President, making it the prism of the entire campaign, and then when you win the election is when the shift in consciousness comes to fruition. Then you are able to implement solutions while serving as President with a very blue congress. I trust you to decide how you can be more effective. As you ask, I will not automatically assume that being president is the best way for you to cause the change in consciousness.
That is really the deciding factor, how to create the change in consciousness... You readily admit that if the change was already in place, that president is the most influential position to effect change. Your argument is that it is not ready yet for that change because the shift in thinking has not tipped over the cusp. I think if you do not become a candidate your message will lose some of its power. If you announced as candidate, and used your grassroots internet supporters, you could make climate your number 1 issue in a campaign that receives daily media coverage, and you can effect the shift in consciousness in time for this crucial election, while there is still time. Then you can lead as president to a solution within the 5-10 year window we have. 2016 is 9 years from today. That is outside the window of action that you yourself believe in. So does everything add up here, or is there something missing?
Al, please run.
Be sure to write in Al Gore in The Democracy for America Pulse poll