Monday, December 7, 2015

how is "pollution" not "terrorism?"

LE BOURGET, France (AP) — Talks on a universal climate pact shifted to a higher gear Monday with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urging governments to set off an "energy revolution" to rein in heat-trapping carbon emissions and avert disastrous global warming.
Simultaneously, in Beijing,
[BBC] Schools in Beijing are to close and outdoor construction to stop after the Chinese capital issued its first "red alert" over smog levels.
The red alert is the highest possible, and has not been used in the city before, the state-run Xinhua news agency says.
Authorities expect more than three consecutive days of severe smog.
Cars with odd and even number plates will be banned from driving on alternate days.
And, all-but simultaneously in the United States,
President Barack Obama on Sunday laid out the most sweeping defense yet of his strategy to defeat Islamic State, but he offered no U.S. policy shift to confront what he called a "new phase" in the terrorist threat after a mass shooting in California.
With the word "terrorism"infiltrating increasing numbers of nooks and crannies of the social consciousness, I wonder at what point analysts and alarm-ringers will get around to the notion that pollution is terrorism.

On the one hand, how is it not terrorism when pollution affects swaths of human beings and probably has a hand in slaughtering them. On the other hand, of course, declaring pollution to be a very concrete, if subtle, form of terrorism would call into question the income streams of those bathed in wealth and power.

Death has always been a price the wealthy are willing to pay -- your death, not theirs -- but when the sources of their comfort are whittled away by their own forward-looking institutions and industries ... oh dear, what a conundrum.

Beijing all but shut down. Imagine that. All the ideology in the world falls flat on its face.

Pollution as terrorism ... we'll see if anyone has the nerve to float that postulate and then follow the Yellow Brick Road outside the routine whining and knicker-twisting..

1 comment:

  1. It's taken nearly forty years to come to the conclusion that climate change is indeed a human caused problem. If you declare it a crime and follow the money, it becomes a so and so's caused problem. Holding someone responsible could keep lawyers busy for centuries i expect. And each time a defendant died of old age, you'd have to start anew.

    Of course this is defining terrorism as a crime rather than a war. To date we've defined it as a war. This makes the protagonist someone outside of our borders and a matter for the defense department rather than the justice department. Either way, we who vote and pay taxes are not responsible. We benefit too indirectly to have our feet held to the fire.

    That americans want energy has always been the excuse to pollute. We voted for this with our dollars. But the fine print of collusion and outcomes is isn't properly labeled. Had someone asked me directly, i'd offer to live with less power rather than send a child to die in a war to protect my power usage.

    Consequences are rarely held up and measured against benefit. Responsibility is shunned. There is nobody in charge who might take those who benefited to task. It's not new as things go. But we are seriously running out of wiggle room.