The power of one

I had the pleasure of seeing "An Inconvenient Truth" this weekend, a sobering film that, while offering its viewers ample opportunities to retreat into abject pessimism, most likely convinces them to become empowered activists and advocates for environmental change. Never have I felt more distressed about the harm we've caused on Earth. Never have I felt more motivated to do something about it.

I was reminded, however, as I watched painful example after painful example of the stubbornness of so many to see the truth, that we indeed have the power to affect change. We are the ones we've been waiting for. And waiting one moment longer for those deniers, those accomplices to environmental catastrophe, those accessories to murder to come around is a moment we could have spent changing things for the better.

Since "An Inconvenient Truth" became a part of our national consciousness, both the film and its creator, Al Gore, have been under attack. The Big Oil-backed Sterling Burnett, despite admitting he hadn't yet seen the film, still compared Gore to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. Noted intellectual Glenn Beck said the process behind the film was "like Hitler". Tucker Carlson referred to Gore as a "'zealot,' a 'bible-thumper,' a 'wild-eyed religious nut' whose 'religion is the environment'".

In addition to such baseless, below-the-belt personal attacks on Gore, the media have given ample time to global warming deniers, those industry-backed "experts" whose only goal is to make vague a starkly clear issue. Thanks to a huge push from Big Oil, we've seen a barrage of misinformation calculated to cast doubt on global warming. Joining in, of course, has been right-wing outlets like Fox News, whose David Asman wondered whether Gore's film would put "our economy on the skids". To such denials and criticisms Gore responded, "Well, I guess in some quarters there's still a debate over whether the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona or whether the earth is flat instead of round."

And that's just it. Casting doubt on something so clear as the disastrous, growing effects of global warming has long been a right-wing goal. In the movie, for instance, Gore presents a study done on a large sample of peer-reviewed journals looking at the percentage of articles casting doubt on global warming. The study found no dissenting opinion. None. Gore then presented a similar study of mainstream news reports. More than half of the reports cast doubt on the issue the scientific community is unanimously behind. So, in this way, the denial lobby has already won, their chief product being doubt, not energy.*

If we're going to do this, if we're going to work for a better tomorrow, we're going to do so in the face of such massive opposition. We're going to do so despite the fact that a large proportion of the population is living in complete denial. We're going to do so knowing that our opponents resort to shameful, personal attacks because they can't debate us on the merits of our arguments. We're going to do so while those in our way refuse to become a part of the solution, instead willfully remaining a part of the problem. But make no mistake, we're going to do so.

It shouldn't surprise us when we encounter fervent opposition while we fight for progressive values. When an old way of thinking is rendered obsolete by emerging realities, it's hard for some people to accept change. It's not enough for them to embrace a dying model. No, they've got to fight, tooth-and-nail, to see that we fail. In this case, the incestuous relationship between the energy lobby and the Republican Party has resulted in an ongoing campaign to paint the most important issue of our time as an affront to commerce and an extremist position only debated by radicals. But if you let yourself get caught up in the right wing's tried-and-true disinformation-mongering, it's easy to lose sight of the goal.

And this is one of the many great aspects of "An Inconvenient Truth". Sure, as we know, we'll encounter resistance when we fight for change. That's a given. Some people will never come around. Some people will remain oblivious to the fact that the world is moving on without them. Some people will fight to see that things don't get any better. But we don't fight to change every mind. We can't. Not all at once. When we do, every moment we waste on those who will never come to the light is a moment we don't spend making things better. What we can do starts with us. It starts by our becoming advocates for change at all levels. It starts by our not despairing when we run into opposition. Their protests only mean what we're doing is working.

* For more on this comparison, go here and here.

Comments

[Mentarch]

I am all for a free market-based economy. Competition drives initiative and creativity, leading to better (or new) products as well as to better (or new) services, and henceforth to a better and greater choice for consummers. This in turn will usually translate well into job creation or maintenance, along with better salaries. And this in turn will usually translate into better individual spending powers and higher standards of living.

However, trusting in corporations to "do the right thing" with regards to the welfare of society and/or the environment is pure nonsense. The reality is that companies live by one thing and one thing only: the bottom line. Hence, companies will do anything, regardless of whether they initially had good intentions or not, to keep profits not only high but also to increase them as well. In other words, companies will cheat, lie or steal, even go as far as to use spying, sabbotage and violence, as means to protect and increase their profit margins. This is simply the nature of the beast.

Therefore, just like societies need laws to place clear definitions of what is acceptable, non-criminal conduct for their citizens, so must there also be laws to place clear definitions of what is acceptable, non-criminal conduct for companies.

Some call these "regulations". I call these necessities, just like criminal laws for the citizenry. After all, laws serve to maintain the welfare, peace and prosperity of society overall.

That is where comes the recent consideration from Québec's government to levy a "carbon tax" on oil and gas companies to help fight global warming. Carbon taxes are also being discussed elsewhere and at large. There is even talk of imposing a tax on gas-guzzling SUVs and cut the sales tax on hybrid vehicles.

Of course, Big Oil and Big Auto are against such initiatives. Their peddlers have even gone as far as to propose instead a cap-and-trade system - another name for more of that "voluntary" nonsense which keeps perpetuating the myth that companies will do the right thing only if we allow them to volunteer to do it. Talk about forgeting everything about human nature and the nature of the corporate beast.

Case in point: the current disinformation ads being run on tv's everywhere by Big Oil companies and their lackeys in their sad attempt to spin global warming, especially in light of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth movie and the belated ressurgence in environmental concerns.

Another case in point: paid-for lackeys of Big Oil going on news programs or writing articles to, as always, not only keep denying global warming but also to attack those warning against it - including the overwhelming majority of scientists having demonstrated its reality.

The fact is that what we are witnessing is what we witnessed already of the saga of tobacco smoking and tobacco companies. This is all history now: disinformation about the dangers of tobacco smoking and outright lying about said dangers by Big Tobacco and their shills, then overwhelming scientific evidence which eventually became undisputable (after all, reality is reality, however one might not like it or fool himself into not accepting!), then taxes on cigarettes and related tobacco products which gradually contributed in decreasing the numbers of smokers, then laws against ads for tobacco products, bans against smoking in public places, and so on.

So, all I can say is: here we go again.

And if we remain standfast and especially vigilant of our politicians and medias, the battle to turn the tide on our destruction of the environment will ultimately prevail.

Just like society did against Big Tobacco.

We will not only change our own attitudes and awareness for the better, we will make laws to curb the nature of the beast of Big Oil and Big Auto. This in turn will facilitate and accelerate the implementation of better technologies and products that do not contribute anymore to pollution and global warming.

Societies need the Rule of Law for their continued peace, welfare and prosperity - all the while remaining modern, democratic societies with free market-based economies.

And to live on a safer and healthier planet at that.

[Mentarch]

(for some reason, my comment was cut - here is the rest of it)

... The fact is that what we are witnessing is what we witnessed already of the saga of tobacco smoking and tobacco companies. This is all history now: disinformation about the dangers of tobacco smoking and outright lying about said dangers by Big Tobacco and their shills, then overwhelming scientific evidence which eventually became undisputable (after all, reality is reality, however one might not like it or fool himself into not accepting!), then taxes on cigarettes and related tobacco products which gradually contributed in decreasing the numbers of smokers, then laws against ads for tobacco products, bans against smoking in public places, and so on.

So, all I can say is: here we go again.

And if we remain standfast and especially vigilant of our politicians and medias, the battle to turn the tide on our destruction of the environment will ultimately prevail.

Just like society did against Big Tobacco.

We will not only change our own attitudes and awareness for the better, we will make laws to curb the nature of the beast of Big Oil and Big Auto. This in turn will facilitate and accelerate the implementation of better technologies and products that do not contribute anymore to pollution and global warming.

Societies need the Rule of Law for their continued peace, welfare and prosperity - all the while remaining modern, democratic societies with free market-based economies.

And to live on a safer and healthier planet at that.

[Mentarch]

I am truly sorry for this messing up on my part - my original comment appeared cut short and I posted the rest of it - but now it appears in its entirety. My most sincere apologies.

[muckdog]

It's a great publicity stunt for Brother Al. That's for sure. I certainly don't buy his doomsday vision, and the way folks are lining at the gas pumps this week they don't seem to either.

[Joseph]

You're the exact type of person I was thinking about when I wrote, "Some people will never come around. Some people will remain oblivious to the fact that the world is moving on without them. Some people will fight to see that things don't get any better."