Children urge adults to heed science

(December 24, 2019)

Thirty-nine years ago, I wrote the first Christmas editorial for the (independent) Winnipeg Sun. It was about the magic of Christmas, answering again the question first asked by Virginia in 1897, that yes, of course, there is a Santa Claus.

Certainly, the Hallmark people believe it. Their “Countdown to Christmas” floods the airwaves with jolly Santas and various romantic miracles involving over-decorated homes, lavish parties and one-kiss happy endings — some shot right here in Manitoba.

We put up with the predictable plots and the painful dialogue because we know no blood will be spilled and everything will untangle and work out just nicely, in 90 minutes.

If only things untangled as easily and as quickly in the rest of our lives — and in our world!

Instead of a Hallmark holiday wish list, with all the items delivered by that jolly old elf and his helpers, the children this year are — figuratively — getting a lump of coal. However hard it might be for you to believe in Santa Claus, children right now are finding it much harder to believe in the wisdom of the adults in their lives.

Told to study science, to learn about the world as it is; told to think critically about what they should do; lectured to make wise decisions for how they live — they are instead given a textbook lesson in “Do as I say, not as I do.”

The bizarre picture of children unsuccessfully pleading with adults to “Listen to the science” and to make wise choices for their future would have been rejected as a movie plot 40 years ago. And yet, here we are.

The examples of idiocy are easy to find, close to home and on the other side of the world.

As Australia battles the worst wildfires in its history, and prepares somehow for record temperatures of 50 C (which few organisms can survive), its government approves new coal plants, argues against climate mitigation and tells everyone just to put another shrimp on the barbie.

There is something profoundly wrong when the children are forced to be gritty realists, while their parents wallow in the Hallmark fantasy world of party planners and Christmas tree lots.

The imagination of young people can be a powerful lever for change, taking what the adults see as impossible situations and turning them upside down.

I remember the 1980s, as we marched against nuclear weapons, joined hands with members of trade union Solidarity in the streets of Poland — and then watched U.S. president Ronald Reagan and Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev walk the world back from the nuclear brink. It was a time of glasnost, of perestroika, of major changes that saw the end of the U.S.S.R. and the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Apartheid ended in South Africa, elections were held in Zimbabwe. It seemed like another world was more than simply possible: it was just ahead. Young people took their energy, their imagination, their hopes out into the street — and, against all odds, things changed.

But this year, there was no Miracle in Madrid. The COP25 conference concluded with weak outcomes (or none at all) on the key barriers to making the Paris Agreement work. Billed as the last, best chance to put the planet on a path to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius, the climate conference was a failure. No timelines were agreed to, no measures were taken to ensure countries met their targets — nothing of any significance at all.

It was about power, but not solar or wind; just plain power, with the hegemony of the large industrialized nations ensuring that nothing was decided that would undermine their national interests. While the doors were closed on civil-society participants who protested the lack of action, the oil and gas lobby smugly continued to schmooze inside.

In terms of multilateral negotiations for a planetary future, COP25 marks the turning point in the culture of globalization we have been fed since the founding of the United Nations in 1945. A “One planet, one world” solution to the climate crisis no longer seems possible by negotiation.

There will be action, instead, from those children who now know for certain that the political and economic structures of the global system are rigged against change, against science, against the very survival of the next generation — against them, personally.

In 1980, the Winnipeg Sun editors tagged my piece as “The Magic of Innocent Imagination.”

Today, it would read “The Power of a Child.”

That, after all, is the real story of Christmas — that the birth of a child, laid in a manger, was enough to transform the most powerful empire in history and turn its values upside down.

The leaders of COP25 should not be congratulating themselves. They have just guaranteed that when change comes, they will be on the outside, pleading to get in.

Read More

Despite resistance, change is coming

(December 6, 2019)

The last-minute cancellation of the COP25 climate change conference in Chile because of political unrest, forcing these crucial meetings to be moved instead to Madrid, reflects the current trouble that world leaders must manage.

But as I reflected on what to write, my focus kept shifting. Globally, the emissions gap report from the United Nations Environment Programme showed how far we have to go to meet the targets set in Paris — which themselves are not enough to stop the planet from warming to dangerous levels. Falling short of the Paris targets means catastrophe.

Federally, the Eco-fiscal Commission’s final report shows how far Canada is from reaching its own targets, and calls for a fourfold increase in the federal carbon tax if we are to have a prayer of reaching the Paris targets we agreed to meet.

Provincially, the Manitoba government continues to flounder, deciding it is a good time to de-fund environmental NGOs that have been working on a cleaner, greener province for decades, while demanding applause for its deeply flawed Climate and Green Plan.

At a city level, where emissions from transportation are our largest source of greenhouse-gas emissions, cuts and barriers to public transit lead the list of Winnipeg city council’s money-saving alternatives.

On the environmental side, at all levels, therefore, our failure is abject. Despite science, observation, common sense, dire warnings and whatever else, trouble is coming.

If you live in California, Australia or any of a dozen region suffering the effects of extreme weather events right now, you might say it is already here.

Yet the greatest failure right now is actually not environmental; it is political. At all these different levels, there are people who are supposed to be leaders, who are responsible for doing what is needed, what is right, on behalf of those people who have elected, appointed, followed or simply put up with them.

They simply are not doing their jobs. Dealing with the environmental threat to our collective future requires them to change the way they steer the ship — or we will have to change those leaders for others.

While media storms brew over environmental data and emissions caps elsewhere, the people of Hong Kong have been in the streets protesting against their leaders. They are not alone.

Despite their important victory in recent elections, there is no indication the tactics of the Chinese government and its proxies will change, however. Protests in the streets of Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Egypt, Chile, Bolivia and Venezuela are brewing, too — and any peace is tenuous.

Everywhere, there is a basic distrust of Big Brother-style government, particularly when it is more “big bully” than “brother.”

Young people, who make up an increasing majority of the population worldwide, are especially fed up with the way things are, the way things are run and the grim future that awaits them because of the bullies still clinging to power.

I have always been amazed at the inability of people my age and older to listen to younger generations. We are burying the last of the veterans of the Second World War, which was a young person’s war.

From 1939 to ’45, it was the 17- to-25-year-olds who fought and died for all those freedoms that the demonstrators in Hong Kong want today. Then they rebuilt a shattered global society in the 1950s, ironically setting the stage for their baby boomer children to ignore what younger people of that same age want today.

These millennials, generation X, generation Y, or whatever, are considered too young, too spoiled, too naive, too educated, too inexperienced, too impractical, too idealistic, too lazy, too shallow or always on their cellphones. So, the oldsters feel they must retain control of our society — despite their ongoing failure to grapple with the realities of life in the 21st century.

When these people are told by teenagers like Greta Thunberg that “everything has to change,” their collective response is dismissal, rejection and anger — anything to avoid changing their selfish focus on themselves. They don’t take the bus or use the library — and never will.

This is why young people take to the streets. They aren’t allowed the voice they should have inside the political structures of our world, so they are taking their voice outside into the streets, instead — out of frustration, but with hope.

That there are so many of them, agitating for change, is a good sign. They haven’t given up, like the older generations have. They still think they can make a difference.

Their goal is — somehow — to make our current leaders care about the future. But if leaders don’t start showing by their actions that they care, too — and soon — these young people will find new leaders and some other ways to deal with our global political, economic and environmental crisis.

Change is coming. The only questions are how, who and when.

Read More

Personal attacks just lazy campaigning

(October 17, 2019)

In the critical thinking course I teach, the easiest logical fallacy to illustrate is ad hominem.

Attack the person, because you can’t attack their argument. It’s easy to illustrate, because I just use examples from our election campaigns.

Given the latest provincial results, ad hominem attacks work. At least, this is what the political strategists will say while planning for next time. For me, I recall the 1960s Simon and Garfunkel song Mrs. Robinson, in which after listening to the candidates debate, the lyrics continue: “Laugh about it, shout about it, when you’ve got to choose — any way you look at it, you lose.”

That’s how I felt after the federal leaders English-language debate. Regardless of who slings the mud and whether or not it sticks, we all lose. I am tired of all the ad hominem attacks in this campaign, because they reveal the hollowness of Canadian democracy.

There is no real leadership — instead, we get grandiose promises losers will never have to keep and winners will choose to ignore. We can change governments, but never seem to get ahead.

The Liberal government began with a honeymoon, because it rolled back the most miserable and inane decisions of the Harper Conservative government. When it came to keeping its own election promises, there was no electoral reform and Indigenous Peoples received treatment little different than before.

On the environmental front, the federal government bought a leaky old pipeline and trampled both Indigenous land rights and environmental review processes with the intention of ramming through new ones.

With the New Democratic Party, I thought Jagmeet Singh’s brightly coloured turban would have made him stand out in the last Parliament’s affairs, even before he had a seat in the House. But he was painfully absent from much of Canada most of the time until the election campaign began.

If there were NDP policy alternatives to Trudeau schmooze and Scheer bafflegab, they were buried in somebody’s desk in Ottawa when they should have been peddled (pun intended) across the country like Singh’s book.

The only bright spot in the past four years was Elizabeth May getting arrested for protesting against the pipeline — having the guts to take a stand for what was right, rather than what was politic. That action matched her actions as leader, with her personal convictions and the Green party’s policies — a remarkable triple play, because it is so rare in Canadian politics. Her lone voice is not alone anymore, but she remains, at best, most people’s second choice for prime minister.

The fortunes of the Trudeau government waxed and waned with Trudeau’s own — from clumsily wearing costumes to SNC-Lavalin controversies, from gender-balanced cabinet crowing to eating crow as he sacked Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott, from party face to brownface to red face, as he went on his apology tour for past indiscretions.

Turning to the Conservatives, Andrew Scheer still makes people nervous, because every time he speaks, we are left wondering if another Harper-style, ego-driven autocrat lurks behind his pudgy dimples and vague promises.

And, as we wonder about Scheer, right-wing governments elsewhere (in the hands of U.S. President Donald Trump, Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Alberta Premier Jason Kenney) find new and disturbing ways to shatter the lives of ordinary people, stealing headlines and attention from the crucial issues the world desperately needs to address.

Scheer has had his own misfires — including his U.S. citizenship reveal. Trudeau’s debate zinger that People’s Party of Canada Leader Maxime Bernier says out loud what Scheer is only thinking is hard for the Conservatives to refute, given their platform on such trigger issues restricting immigration and reducing foreign aid to underdeveloped countries.

But after walking the streets of Winnipeg with 12,000 other people last month, I think the biggest failure of all these players is their weak-kneed response to the climate crisis. We need a coalition for the planet that crosses party lines and sidelines the egos of all their leaders in favour of working together for the common good. If we want a better future for all of our children, then business as usual can’t continue. Climate change requires us to change. Now.

Scheer and his Conservatives dodge that reality, among others — refusing to participate in debates on climate issues and effectively pretending the world has stood still since 1955. Trudeau and his Liberals offer more hope, but need to convince voters their plans are not just green paint over the same old pipeline, and more election promises that won’t be kept.

For the NDP, the climate crisis is one of their key issues, but wanting change is not the same as having a practical plan to make it happen.

Colour me Green? Maybe — but certainly no blue face this time for me.

In the current climate, it’s too risky.

Read more