Several months ago, more than two dozen United States Senators held an all-night vigil and speech-making about climate change. Their efforts focused on the urgent need for an appropriate demonstration of legislative initiative and leadership from Congress. Predictably, given the Republican-dominated House of Representative’s general aversion to facts when they conflict with ideology, the symbolic gesture was nothing but that.
This failure to govern is the most egregious and depressing aspect of American life today. It is driven by short-term thinking, blatant self-interest, indifference to science, and ideological principles that are at best contradictory, exclusionary, and regressive.
Communication, compromise, and consensus -- three pillars of practical and successful governance -- have been abandoned and relegated to the memory of a time when civil discourse and legislative innovation recognized and addressed the most pressing problems of the day.
These tactics and strategies end … when?
Is there some moderator who can instruct far-right knuckleheads elected to office that their responsibilities in Washington extend beyond the narrowest of narrow-minded interests? And while she or he is at it, might they offer a word of explanation that when legislators do nothing, nothing is not usually the outcome to those of us out here in the real world dealing with real problems in our very real lives?
When did stupidity become the preferred qualification for governing? Those loyal patriots and (usually) devoted Christians might want to consider the weight of “We reap what we sow.” Allowing major problems of the day [the quote above referenced a climate change issue in particular, although author Peter Neill did so in the context of it being “one of the most pressing issues for the future of our national security, our public health, our financial viability over time, and our standing as a world leader,”—if that matters.]
Last year, I raised a similar concern while addressing peak oil in particular, but climate change as well:
Peak Oil (and climate change) are—to those of us who do accept the evidence and expert assessments—serious, fact-based realities which will soon enough impose some rather unpleasant, widespread, and irrevocable changes on how we live and work … all of us, even those on the Right who presently find almost nothing about either topic to be worth contemplating at all. That poses a dilemma....
When ‘dialogue’ about a contentious topic features facts on one side [coupled with] a genuine desire to find solutions, and fear-based irrelevancies and/or half-truths and/or misrepresentations on the other side, how can anyone expect meaningful exchanges and acceptable solutions? What’s the benefit in not having solutions to urgent challenges because ideologies must be protected first...?
Is there an answer from the Right to that simplest of inquiries? By what form of magical thinking do they remain convinced that by ignoring reality, it will go away?
A nation with a substantial number of leaders untethered from the realization that science is not science fiction, and that the conclusions offered by the collective efforts of tens of thousands of trained experts actually merits consideration, is a nation which had better be preparing itself for the Mother Of All Consequences.
But, of course, that’s not happening, either. As Neill observed:
If we choose to deny looking beyond, toward the reality, the consequence, even the hypothetical probabilities, of our failure to act, we are abrogating the very idea of responsible governance, such a condition one of the defining characteristics of a failed state.
I don’t think that ought to be in anyone’s Top Ten Objectives. Did I miss something in civics class when the purpose of governing was explained?
Do these officials and media suck-ups have some kind of anti-consequence pill which is triggered by paranoia and ignorance? Are they planning a sojourn to another planet just before the irreversible impact of climate change is irrefutable even to the dumbest of the dumb, thus avoiding both responsibility and retribution for their blind obedience to those who continue to care not even a little about the well-being of their fellow citizens?
Might there be a twinge of conscience from at least some of these pandering fools when they realize that “I’ve got mine and so I don’t give a f*&ck about anyone else” might not be the noblest of principles to abide by?
Maybe it’s just me, but this additional comment from Neill’s excellent article doesn’t sound like much of a strategy, and I don’t find myself getting all that excited about the outcomes.
We ignore the results; we deny the evidence; we ridicule the proposed solutions; and we obfuscate any ideas and subvert any individuals that argue otherwise.
We are exhausting the land, the atmosphere, the ocean, and ourselves. We deny the obvious; we deny any suggestion of change; and we deny, by the inevitable outcome of our paralysis, any counter to the equally inevitable decline of our failure to act, even for our children.
Explaining why Americans elected morons and that we thus get precisely what we deserved is not going to soothe the concerns of my children, and probably not yours.
What is it going to take for what was at least once presumed to be a group of intelligent men and women to realize that what they do and don’t do as elected officials actually matters to all of us, and in some cases, for a very long time?
We have choices….
Top Comments Submission Made Easy
|