My writings - and those of others.
Armchair Quarterbacking
The morning news pundits and reporters raise several issues that they are complaining about today, leading me to wonder how they would actually manage them better. I doubt that I could and suspect that they wouldn’t do any better. But I can sometimes reframe the questions. What are the ones they raise for me?
Is the CEO of one of the country’s large bank the person in the best position to tell the government not to give too much money to the poor and needy? Does he know what having no income at all feels like?
Does rioting in Northern Ireland solve its problems relating to Brexit?
Who should be vaccinated first?
Since distribution policies are causing vaccine surpluses in some communities, while others who need them have no access, are there better ways to fulfil distribution?
Is anyone looking at ordinary Americans need guns at all, rather than chipping away at ways to reduce their use?
Why are provinces in Canada denying sick pay and sending people to the federal government - when the federal government program doesn’t cover the income lost through sickness, doesn’t allow application until after the pay is lost, and has a difficult enrollment process to obtain it?
Why, when parts of the world despair of having enough vaccines, does a Canadian company that wants to produce them, have such a difficult time to get government support to do so?
Why did a prime minister let his family support a charity so obviously involved with celebrity star power?
Why were big box stores allowed to sell anything but essential items in the first place during the entire pandemic?
If we want to reduce carbon emissions from cars, why aren’t we looking at how other countries have produced such cars at lower cost?
Why haven’t public health communications looked more closely at human behaviour patterns?
Why do corporations get away with paying low taxes or no taxes?
I haven’t easy answers to any of these. And therein lies a tale. Most of us spend little or no time on thinking about any of these. That means that we let others muddle through when the possibility of better answers depends on the engagement and determination of all of us to create better answers. These are opportunities missed.
Another Woman of Note
Katherine Hayhoe turns up frequently when climate science is the topic. She came from Toronto and studied first at the University of Toronto starting with astrophyics but later became interested in climate science. Until recently she was head of climate science at Texas Tech University but has stepped down to become the first head of the Nature Conservancy - the first woman to head that body which is involved in environmental protection in 72 countries.
Hayhoe has a particular gift as an Evangelical in speaking to relgious organizations from that perspective. In a seminar when she appeared in Toronto, she noted that if she could convince her preacher husband, after that anyone else would be easy. Along with other women scientists she has teamed up to start Science Moms, providing basic information for families of young children. As well as its website, it has embarked on a number of public service bulletins to spread the word.
Hayhoe has received several citations for her work on climate: the U.N. Champions of the Earth award in 2019, and climate ambassador by the World Evangelical Alliance. You can also watch her TED talk here and add to the four million views.
Democracy and Climate
When we make The UK Guardian with news that one of Canada’s political parties refuses to state that climate change is real, we might like to shrink with embarrassment. When the Supreme Count rules that the federal government does have oversight of climate change - part of the continuing conversation about whether provinces or national government takes the lead, we might feel better - even if the decision is not unanimous. Decisions need clarity in a democracy.
The second book I read recently was Jonathan Manthorpe’s Restoring Democracy in an Age of Populists and Pestilence. It reflects his more than 40 years of work as a journalist and is an excellent review of what has happened in a wide range of countries. He notes that Francis Fukuyama’s original optimistic view that the only things that could affect western liberal democracy would be religion and nationalism and that wouldn’t happen - except that it has. By now, both know that and Manthorpe worries about its impact on his grandchildren and their world to come. Authoritarianism is much more popular and dangerous now in the West and Brexit and Trumpism bear that out. Before dealing with them in some detail he reconstructs the last two decades in the former Russian empire and the rise of China in a face paced and entertaining read.
He’s less worried about Canada than Europe or the United States but he doesn’t let us off the hook entirely. Compared to other countries we may look calm. While the first half of the last century was influenced by our British heritage - and my own life reflects that - the last half drew us closer to America. Now we feel somewhat estranged from both. The Huawei involvement has created new problems with China. Our isolation from traditional partners may require us to seek new ones. Manthorpe is not happy about our political administrative government systems imported from Britain, especially because of the differences in our geography, where huge areas create regions with different stresses and aspirations. Federal and Provincial conflicts are a way of life - but more interesting to the politicians than ordinary citizens. Getting things settled by the courts doesn’t necessarily help.
Our media, like those of our neighbour to the south, focus on news as entertainment and opinion often swamps actual news reporting more often than we realize. The lack of local press makes this even worse. Regional grievances are rampant. We have too many governing bodies with endless subcommittees that operate as silos; only a crisis like a pandemic lays these bare. Politics has taken a focus on leaders as folk heroes or villains making politics a matter of celebrities and influencers, rather than a matter of policies. Partisanship is not as virulent in Canada as it is in the US, but it is there - and a central consensus is becoming harder to find. Our reliance on oil and gas is going to be a force to be reckoned with. We require restructuring and retraining even more since the emergency of the pandemic.
Votes and voting will matter. So will a civil service that is competent and respected by all political parties. As we move into the new pressures brought on by climate change, engagement and trust of ordinary citizens will matter even more.
Good reading
I’ve finished two books in the last ten days. The first was an audio version read by its author Rachel Maddow entitled Blowout. It’s a history of the fossil fuel industry.
She is not someone I watch regularly on TV - but what I have seen suggests that she comes with strong views, a focus on facts and a wry wit. These are all borne out in the recent book - which I first heard about at the end of 2019 at an environmental seminar.
Her view is hardly unbiased and starts from the premise that the point of the industry is to make money come hell or high water and basically do as it pleases. No government anywhere has ever come close to controlling it.
She alternates between its development in Russia and in the United States and focuses on the fact of industry greed without having any idea of the consequences of its actions. Part of its success relates to its size and reach across the entire planet.
A blowout happens when the pressure of an oil or gas well builds up beyond the limits of its control system and backs up in an explosion. In the process blowouts have affected water systems and have caused earthquakes though the development of horizontal drilling. Never mind killing pets and making countless people sick who reside close to wells.
The book ties together a number of fascinating stories ranging from incompetent Russian spies, to a multimillion dollar playboy from Equatorial Guinea who enjoys giving his girlfriends $80,000 for shopping trips in Malibu, while three quarters of the citizens of his country starve. We move through entrepreneurs in Oklahoma, Texans who want to secede. Always lurking behind the scenes is Vladimir Putin who will do whatever he can to stir the pot. From Standard Oil to the present, one of the inevitable results is all countries depending on industry support for the election of its officials - who then use government money to return the favour in the form of government subsidies to the most profitable industry on earth.
Changing this will be an enormous challenge everywhere. What will count, Maddow says, is paying attention and asking questions. Our futures will undoubtedly depend upon that.
Polarization around climate change
Photo Credit::University of Virginia Race and Democracy Lab
A recent conversation with one of my sons centered on the importance of curation in the age of too much information. I’m interested in how what I read frames and changes my own knowledge. I came upon this video recently which tackles this important divergence. While the video is quite long I urge you to watch the whole thing. If you can’t because of your own information overload, you could use the trailer which I have also posted below.
We sometimes forget that any point of view in the present has a history of formation in the past as well as implications for how it plays out in the future. The University of Virginia created a Religion, Race & Democracy Lab and explored how these elements interface. It tells us:
“The video addresses decades of what it calls “religious polarization, political propaganda, corporate deal-making, and environmental injustice based on systemic racism.”
You can find the full version here.
Or view the trailer here