EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Mother's Plea for Sasha and Malia: No Tar Sands Pipeline
Children have a way of speaking to our hearts.
Daphne Wysham gets arrested at the White House while protesting the Keystone XL pipeline. (Photo by Shadia Fayne Wood)
As a single mother whose life's work has largely focused on solving the climate crisis, I'm often in a quandary. How much should I share of the work I do on this issue — which overwhelms those rare adults who immerse themselves in the details with grief — with my 11-year-old son?
When I posed this question in an interview with NASA's top climate scientist, Dr. James Hansen, who often speaks of his grandchildren as his motivator for speaking out on climate change, he advised me that it's more important to let a child be a child. Let them experience the wonder and beauty of nature, not fear it, he said.
And so I was a bit perplexed as to what to tell my son as I prepared to get arrested for the first time in my life. It turned out I'd be joining over 1,000 people from around the United States and Canada in nonviolently protesting a pipeline that President Barack Obama is poised to approve.
This isn't just any pipeline: It is, as Dr. Hansen calls it, a pipeline that, if opened, would ignite the "carbon bomb," a move that would signal "game over" for the climate.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Irene, my son and I watched the movie Avatar on DVD (for the nth time). As it ended, I thought: This might be a good opportunity to explain my plans for that week.
"You know, this movie is very close to what's happening in Canada right now," I explained. "And it's one reason I'll be getting arrested this week."
As my son took in my explanation for my planned act of civil disobedience, he quickly concluded that he, too, wanted to be arrested. But, after some hours of contemplation, I had to reluctantly tell him no.
Why "reluctantly"? Because I felt I was denying my son the right to act, politically, on an issue that would very likely have a much larger impact on his life than on mine. He, far more than the adults who were weighing in, should have a vote on this issue. Yet he, and all our children, have little say on the world they'll inherit, one that may be changed utterly, in ways we can't even comprehend.
As I stood before the White House gates a few days later, listening to the police issue their warnings of our impending arrests to our group of over 100 demonstrators, I thought of what I would say as they carted me away — what cry I wanted the president to hear.
And I recalled the day Obama stood before the American people, in those days and months as BP's deepwater well billowed millions of barrels of oil from that horrifying wound in the Gulf of Mexico floor. I remembered him remarking that, yes, he was very concerned about the spill because, while he shaved one morning, his 11-year-old daughter Malia had asked him, "Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?"
Children have a way of speaking to our hearts. And so, I mused, even if President Obama didn't hear the songs and the chants of the more than 1,000 people who were arrested over the course of two weeks, even if the prayers of religious leaders and Native American elders went unanswered, even if he didn't read the editorial opposing the Keystone XL pipeline in The New York Times, even if he ignored the advice of his very own EPA, perhaps, in this instance, Sasha or Malia might see us outside the White House gates, and ask him, "Did you stop the pipeline yet, Daddy?"
As the police handcuffed my hands behind me and led me off to a white school bus, I shouted: "For Sasha and Malia!"
I don't think Obama or his daughters heard me, I thought, as I watched my fellow protesters be cuffed, searched and photographed through the bus's caged windows. But perhaps, if we keep this up, they will.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
54 Comments so far
Show AllNo,Daphne, they won't hear you.
As a personal note, i care about these issues without even having children. That may surprise people, however, i care, directly, about the planet itself and those who are not even blood related to me. Imagine that!
I am not at all surprised that a person such as you without children would care deeply about global warming and climate change.
Rather, I find it disturbing, even if not all that surprising, that so many people both with and without children seem not to care about these issues at all.
Just because someone with children grieves about what is happening to life on this planet with their own children in mind and the children of others in mind does not mean we think others who have no children do not care.
Please do not get the idea that people with children somehow think that their grief is necessarily any more genuine than your grief.
Parents have to figure out when and how to talk to their children about unpleasant truths. Children, of course, will learn about these things in one way or another from other people and from the very reality of the world within which they live.
It is natural to ask of people like Barack Obama, who clearly are not really all that concerned about global warming and climate change and who are in positions of power, how they can fail to do anything of any significance about a problem which will have such a profoundly negative impact on the lives of their own children and grandchildren.
What kind of human being is so careless in the care of his or her own children?
What kind of human being is so careless with the fate of all life on this planet?
Thank you for a heart felt response, Puffin. Well said.
When considering those who are holding the reigns of power (which is not necessarily the definition of true power - the power to create), i often think that they have an escape plan for themselves and their families. We do know of the high end disaster plans that have already been purchased through contractors. Personally, i believe that people such as obama, have a way out. I don't believe it will work out as they plan, of course. But we do know of the underground bunkers, which are far more than mere 'bunkers'. They know, far better than the masses do, how far gone we truly are, environmentally speaking.
readytotransform,
I agee with you completely.
Not long after Katrina I read that Blackwater (now Xe) was starting a new line of business offering evacuation servioes for the wealthy.
PuffinThrush,
You asked, "What kind of human being is so careless in the care of his or her own children? What kind of human being is so careless with the fate of all life on this planet?"
Brain washed, drugged people do. When you think about children, think about all the terribly obese children and physically unfit children we have in America. Childhood obesity is child abuse, yet millions of American parents condone it every day and feed their children poisonous food laden with high fructose corn syrup and chemicals that never have been tested for human consumption. And the parents themselves consume the same crap and pop pills for their depression and anxiety and every other imagined illness, not realizing that their depression and anxiety comes from their subconscious knowledge that the world is going to hell.
You know something, Tomcarberry, when i work with people (psychologist/healer), i almost always talk about how global events on all levels are effecting them emotionally and more. I make it a point to bring it up and tell them that if a fish were swimming in a poisoned aquarium, it would most certainly be effected, even if it didn't consciously reflect upon the situation.
And those pills are also being given to the children, which is also child abuse in most all cases.
Readytotransform, I agree with the fish analogy. As to pills for kids, I volunteered in an elementary school a few years ago and the teacher asked me to handle one kid. He was very smart, but didn't want to learn to read because he wanted to be a comedian and thought he just needed to learn to talk and tell jokes. I went through comedy movies with him and showed him how they all had writers. So he started to really work on reading. But the next semester I came back and he was totally different. Subdued, he would just sit there. I learned the school had insisted he go on Ritalin for ADHD. I quit volunteering.
tomcarberry, i am not at all surprised by your experience. Big pharma actually wrote the latest diagnostic manuel along with certain psychiatrists. This is a first. And specific meds are actually suggested. I have seen people who were like zombies and these are adults. Children cant do the research and need to count on parents who often, along with the schools, use meds for purposes of control.
It's all about the money. That is not to say that there are people who i do refer to the psychiatrist, because i feel they need relief. However, the emotions are almost always blocked, flattened affect, and then they don't even know what they are feeling. Often i see people who are on three different antidepressants at once. When they decide to liberate themselves, they often feel better off the meds, since flattened affect and sexual side effects, along with weight gain are themselves symptoms of depression.
The over use of this 'medical model' of human beings as a bag of chemicals and nothing more, is definitely part of the dehumanization we see at all levels of our culture. And to boot, no one really knows how or why many of these meds even work.
tomcarberry wrote:
PuffinThrush,
You asked, "What kind of human being is so careless in the care of his or her own children? What kind of human being is so careless with the fate of all life on this planet?"
* * * * *
My Reply:
tomcarberry,
The questions were rhetorical, but thanks for your answers.
tomcarberry and readytotransform,
Depression can have multiple causes. Given what we think we know, those causes may include genetic pre-dispositions toward depression. Depression can also have multiple symptoms including frequent, spontaneous altered states of consciousness episodes such as derealization experiences. Medication can be crucial to relieving the sense of hopeless, and can end the altered states that sometimes are associated with depression.
Certainly, living in a society seemingly hell bent on self-destruction can be seriously depressing. Sometimes medication can make it easier to deal with all that by minimizing the effect of other more endogenous causes.
Personally, I' will say that the derealization experiences themselves can be rather interesting at least for a while, absent the deep depression.
PuffinThrush, This is an argument for a different place, but the evidence on the efficacy of psychiatric medications is that they don't work, are addictive, and mask rather than heal our problems. If people want to feel good with drugs, why use SSRIs that prevent the re-uptake of the puny neurotransmitter serotonin, when they could use coke that prevents the re-uptake of the big boy of neurotransmitters, dopamine? Mainly because doctors prescribe the first and make huge profits for the pharmaceutical companies and Wall Street, while dope dealers provide the latter and make huge profits for the cartels and Wall Street, and you can go to prison for coke.
Drugs are drugs, whether prescribed by a psychiatrist or your corner dealer. I don't oppose using drugs as humans have used psychoactive drugs for millenia, but I do oppose their use to "cure" what ails us.
To me, what we call psychiatric illness are problems of life. People face terrible problems in life. Drugs can make us feel better about the problems, but they can't fix the problems.
Some of life's problems we can fix on our own, some we can fix with the help of others, and some we just have to live with.
tomcarberry wrote:
Drugs are drugs, whether prescribed by a psychiatrist or your corner dealer. I don't oppose using drugs as humans have used psychoactive drugs for millenia, but I do oppose their use to "cure" what ails us.
To me, what we call psychiatric illness are problems of life. People face terrible problems in life. Drugs can make us feel better about the problems, but they can't fix the problems.
Some of life's problems we can fix on our own, some we can fix with the help of others, and some we just have to live with.
* * * * *
My Reply:
In part we will have to agree to disagree.
First of all, in recent years functional MRI has enabled some important insights into some of the more unusual kinds of "psychiatric illnesses", including those characterized by symptoms of "hearing voices or other sounds" that aren't there, at least externally.
The fact is that the brain and the mind can "malfunction" for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with current or past experience.
Not to worry though, my primary experience with medication for depression began 33 years ago and ended 8 years later. My first derealization experience occurred twelve years before I was first prescribed medication. That is when I was 13 years old. Those derealization experiences vanished immediately, but were not the reason that medication was prescribed.
Are medications for depression overly prescribed? Sure. Can medication and other drugs alter mood? Sure. Are medications sometimes wrongly prescribed to control behavior considered inconvenient or otherwise troublesome? Sure. Can medication and other drugs make us feel better about our problems? I don't know. I suppose so. But that is not what I really experienced.
The depression wasn't really about my problems. My problems were not the cause of the depression, although the depression was certainly the cause of some of my problems. The depression was one of my problems, by far my worst problem, and it is the only problem that medication made me feel better about. Medication simply enabled me to feel and function better in a general sense, and that was very important to me at least.
The experience of grief and living in a society seemingly hell bent on self-destruction can be seriously depressing. But I wouldn't necessarily say that is the same thing as serious chronic depression, certainly not of the more endogenous sort.
I agree with you that "some of life's problems we can fix on our own, some we can fix with the help of others, and some we just have to live with."
What's more I think trying to banish all pain and suffering through medication or through other drugs is nothing more than a futile attempt to avoid what is an essential part of the experience of life.
But the human body and mind are complex. Suffering, mood, and temperment are not always simply a matter of experience, environmental factors, or harmful nurture.
Sometimes medication can be critically important to relieving unbearable suffering. I cannot be convinced otherwise and I will not suggest to others who may suffer from serious chronic depression that this is not true. Such a claim simply is not consistent with my experience.
Nevertheless, thank you for your concern.
tomcarberry (in reply to PuffinThrush) wrote:
This is an argument for a different place, but the evidence on the efficacy of psychiatric medications is that they don't work, are addictive, and mask rather than heal our problems.
- - - - -
tomcarberry (in reply to readytotransform) wrote:
I went through comedy movies with him and showed him how they all had writers. So he started to really work on reading. But the next semester I came back and he was totally different. Subdued, he would just sit there. I learned the school had insisted he go on Ritalin for ADHD. I quit volunteering.
- - - - -
tomcarberry (in reply to PuffinThrush) wrote:
And the parents themselves consume the same crap and pop pills for their depression and anxiety and every other imagined illness, not realizing that their depression and anxiety comes from their subconscious knowledge that the world is going to hell.
* * * * *
tomcarberry,
I am well aware that psychiatrists and doctors can misdiagnose depression and anxiety as well as symptoms of confusion and distractibility. Not long ago someone I know, who had been on two medications for depression for some time, was diagnosed with ADHD. It turned out that the symptoms of confusion and distractibility were side effects of the two drug prescribed for depression.
Still, since you persist in your criticism of medication; I am sorry, but I am going to say it.
Your second statement in reply to me quoted above in this post is highly presumptuous and insensitive.
You claim to know that the evidence on the efficacy of psychiatric medications is that they don't work. Yet like all the rest of us your direct experience is limited, What's more you appear to rely on sources of information that simply confirm your own biases.
Pharmaceutical corporations do overwhelmingly pursue profit not healing. Psychiatrists, psychologists, and “healers” may have their own profit motives as well, Some of these "helpers" appear to be largely incompetent. Many more of them are, like all the rest of us, simply limited in the powers of their ministrations to soothe those who are suffering and who may be confused as well.
All of us, sufferers included, are drenched in copious amounts of propaganda known as advertizing by the pharmaceutical companies either directly through the media we ourselves consume or indirectly through the society we live in (i.e. à la the dynamics of readytotransform's "fish swimming in a poisoned aquarium" analogy).
People who post comments here on Common Dreams frequently offer explanations for human behavior that are based upon science, philosophy, religions, pyschology, economics, ethics, gut feelings, street smarts, and even astrology. With the exception of astrology I think all of these perspectives have something substantial to offer.
Sure, there are plenty of people, who are in some form of denial or who are simply resigned to the fact that the world is going to hell, some of whom are also on medication and some of whom are also not on medication for depression and anxiety.
There are undoubtedly plenty of people, who are not in denial and who are not resigned to the fact that the world is going to hell, some of whom are also on medication and some of whom are also not on medication for depression and anxiety.
Even if you were a great diagnostician and clearly you are not, you simply have no way of knowing who is who without speaking with them personally; and even then you might not know, which also can be said for the rest of us who attempt to figure out what ails those we know.
You shouldn't be dumping on people who are taking medication for depression and anxiety simply because you suppose that depression is always caused by personal problems or the fact that the world is going to hell or both, and apparently also believe that there is no place for medication in the treatment of depression and anxiety.
You sound like an angry and intolerant ideologue.
You could have come up with more accurate and far more relevant answers to my two rhetorical questions.
Instead, you presented a simplistic interpretation of the causes of depression and anxiety, and then treated us to a story where you apparently helped stimulate a young student's interest in reading, but then turned your back on volunteering in the schools because you believed with reason that the student had been improperly medicated for ADHD.
Well, that's just great!
Undoubtedly, that experience was depressing and infuriating.
But that experience does sound like a problem that could have been fixed in part by yourself or with the help of others, as well as a problem that in part could not easily have been fixed at all, and therefore must simply be lived with, no medication required.
So much is made of lowering the national debt so future generations won't be burdened down the road, yet those same people who're so concerned for what the as-yet-unborn might have to pay, never give a thought to the physical ills their actions are creating for the billions of unfortunates who have no voice in the matter, yet will suffer and die for it.
Congratulations! Daphne. I saw Bill McKibben after Day 5 of the Tar Sands Action and he still had on his Park Police plastic ID band. He was wearing it like a badge of honor. Yes, for all the children on the planet, and their children - Stop the Keystone XL Pipeline. Great article. Let's hope Obama is listening. In Point Reyes today, we are having our 30th annual Sand Sculpture Contest on Drakes Beach. We will be building the XL Pipeline crossing the American heartland and Ogallala Aquifer to raise awareness of "dirty" Alberta Tar Sands. - Bing
"This isn't just any pipeline: It is, as Dr. Hansen calls it, a pipeline that, if opened, would ignite the "carbon bomb," a move that would signal "game over" for the climate."
"Game over" may be what is required to change the world. The economy is totally dependent upon oil.
This cannot be changed.
"Game over" probably occurred years, maybe even decades ago.
Agreed. Its probably a moot point.
There are different degrees of "game over." Probably enough disequilibrium has been injected into Earth's climate system to eventually bring an end to industrial civilization as we know it, which is the game Hansen refers to. But the momentum of the imbalance will continue beyond the collapse of civilization. Where will it lead?
(1). To the extinction of nearly all large species, probably including Homo sapiens?
(2). To the runaway greenhouse effect, the "Venus Syndrome" leading to the end of all life?
Though civilization's current game is probably over, we still have some ability to cause or prevent the end of games (1) and (2).
We have past a number of tipping points already, But I don't think the planet Earth is necessarily destined for a climate like Venus because of anthropogenic global warming just yet.
johnboy1@gmx.us wrote:
"Game over" may be what is required to change the world. The economy is totally dependent upon oil.
This cannot be changed.
* * * * *
My Reply:
johnboy1@gmx.us,
Even what James Hansen's means by "game over" together with global peak oil will end the dependence of our economy on oil and other fossil fuels eventually.
Two questions remain.
Just how long will it take for the dependence of our economy on oil and other fossil fuels to "eventually" end?
Will those people who want to protect life on this planet have much say in how and when the reduction in the dependence of our economy on oil and other fossil fuels comes to an end?
You would think that Michelle Obama would be protesting outside the White House to motivate the protestors and to protect Sasha and Malia from this insideous pipeline. Michelle, what the hell are you doing hiding in the people's house with your two daughters? How can you of all people, live there and be indifferent and ignore the people being arrested in front of your house trying to protect not only Sasha and Malia, but millions of other children! Michelle, you should be ashamed of yourself! Daphne cares more about your children than you do! I hope you heard her when she shouted: " THIS IS FOR SASHA AND MALIA".
Sasha and Malia are going to be just fine, regardless of what happens with the climate, and their parents know it. They are the children of a president, children of the elite. They are like Kennedys (not everyone is going to suffer equally, or indeed at all, whatever happens). They don't and won't need any help from protesters.
Maybe they will be fine. Certainly they will fare better than poorer people. However, they will live in a world surrounded by suffering and depletion of nature's bounty. No shrimp cocktail, no fish chowder. Perhaps even for them a higher chance of lymphoma and other cancers, and lung diseases. Perhaps even for them teratogens causing birth defects for their babies. There is a limit as to how much wealth can insulate people from the deterioration of earth's life-support systems.
"No shrimp cocktail, no fish chowder."
Riiiight. The 'girls' are set for life. In fact, they'll probably end up in the Party at some level & end up supporting the same thing daddy is doing right at this very moment: bombing the hell out of people and taking their shit AND polluting what's left of the planet.
Believe me, little Sasha & Malia will be just fine. Like father, like so-...uh, daughter.
Sorta kinda like hedge fund manager Chelsea Clinton.
We are all related even if we don't see it. A mother fox cares no less for her cubs than other forms of life. All of life works together, we are related. Americans have lost
touch with the world and look for their power in the wrong places. One day when I was
walking home a beetle crossed my path in an unusual way. It warned me something not good was at my home. I tried to dismiss it but I knew it was probably not going to be something from a good power. It wasn't. Still I thanked the beetle for being my helper. I should add that at my home I had been using organic methods for several years. I understood the insects and worked with them. I saw a transformation, and
species that I had not seen since I was a kid. I rescued frogs and even garter snakes. I was frightened by the snakes at first because they were babies and I
didn't remember them.
They won't listen. Try and remember that Obama forced his daughters to swim in the Gulf right after the BP oil spill.
I was too idealistic myself, once, expecting a family man to have a heart.
Perhaps everyone should send a message to the White House, asking: "Did you plug the pipeline yet Daddy?"
Having been raised in the town of Fort McMurray (now Wood Buffalo due to a political land and tax grab by a city mayor) and grown up near those oilsands I can, perhaps, offer a little personal perspective and insight. Let me tell you a small bit about the town first.
In 1972, with the initial arrival of the Great Canadian Oil Sands (GCOS) the town had around 1000 people. In 1979 it had 30,000. Growth was slight for awhile so that in 1995 it was only up to 45,000 but then it really started to take off again and early in the 2000's the real population topped 100,000. Now there are still 2 really big players (Sunoco and Exxon through Suncor and Syncrude) and about a dozen second run players (including Shell, BP, some Chinese oil companies, some Japanese oil companies, etc.) in the town and though I was raised in it, expansion has been so steady that today I barely recognise it anymore when I go to visit. The economy is booming and, though it has calmed slightly, it is still going strong. That is a pretty impressive feat when you consider the town routinely drops to -45C in winter, +45C in the summer, is routinely subject to forest fires that are unimaginable outside of the far north, and is probably one of the most expensive towns in all of Canada to live in.
I do not say this as an attempt to boost the towns' image or justify development of the oilsands, but merely to point out that this stuff has been under development for a long time and is still going strong. Blocking this pipeline, while it may prove to be a moral victory, will not change anything about how rapidly the tarsands are being developed. In fact it may even be somewhat of a game to the authorities to allow temporary victories here and there (such as the temporary delay due to improper licensing last winter of some equipment headed for the oil sands) so as to give people the sense they are making a difference. Well, if any of the protests have made a difference, I sure cannot see it. The sands will be mined, as far as I can see, until the extraction process costs more than the oil is worth. That will happen eventually but not for at least a couple more decades yet. With all due respect to James Hansen, this bomb went off years ago before anyone started paying attention, and now that they are, all we appear able to do is sit back and watch it blow. By all means protest in the hopes of stopping the next one, but this Sisyphean rock has started to roll down the mountain and I have no advice on how to even slow it down, let alone stop it.
Good luck folks.
I lived in FT McMurray as well from 1972 when we moved there from off the farm when I was 14 through to my 23rd year when I moved away.
I quite agree that the horse has long since left the barn and that blocking the pipeline will do little to reverse the development. The extraction processes (adjusted for inflation) have been dropping in fact which is why more companies now seek to exploit the resources.
Lower production costs along with a higher price for oil just means more development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_oil_sands
For those with an interest I post this link just for the sake of the map so one can get an idea of how large the deposits are. The section on the economics of the same points out productions costs being comparable to other sources (deep sea etc) The highest costs in fact come from labor and the shortage of skilled workers.
I do not think it can be stopped by blocking this pipeline. The only means by which it can be stopped in my opinion is for a collapse in the price of Oil.
GwNorth (in response to Eccentric) wrote:
I quite agree that the horse has long since left the barn and that blocking the pipeline will do little to reverse the development. The extraction processes (adjusted for inflation) have been dropping in fact which is why more companies now seek to exploit the resources.
Lower production costs along with a higher price for oil just means more development.
- - - - -
GwNorth (in response to Eccentric) wrote:
I do not think it can be stopped by blocking this pipeline. The only means by which it can be stopped in my opinion is for a collapse in the price of Oil.
- - - - -
Excerpt “The White House & Tar Sands” by James Hansen
Article URL:
Real Solution
Let's address a common criticism: “It does no good to stop the Keystone XL pipeline, because other pipelines will be built.” Indeed, pipeline opposition and other stopgap actions (closing a coal–fired power plant, etc.) have little ultimate effect unless we put in place the real solution.
Let me address the following points that would lead to the real solution:
a. 'Law of gravity': as long as fossil fuels are cheapest, someone will burn them.
b. Fossil fuels are cheapest because: direct/indirect subsidies; human health costs not paid by fossil fuel companies; and climate disruption costs not paid by fossil fuel companies.
c. Only workable solution: rising across–the–board flat fee on carbon, collected from fossil companies at point where fossil fuel enters domestic market (domestic mine or port of entry).
d. Larson rate — $10/ton of CO2/year — at year 10 yields 30% reduction in US emissions.
e. 30% of US emissions is ~ 13 Keystone XL pipelines!!!
By year 10 the Larson fee is equivalent to $1/gallon of gasoline. The public will not allow this to happen unless 100% of the collected fee is distributed to the public, which could be done electronically to bank accounts or debit cards. By year 10 the fee collected from fossil fuel companies would be over $500 billion per year, providing $2–3,000 per legal adult resident of the country.
* * * * *
My Reply
Thank you for your comments Eccentric and GwNorth.
I agree that blocking the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline will only slow things down at best. NASA Climatologist James Hansen who was arrested in front of the White House also understands this.
“The only workable solution” that James Hansen describes in the excerpt from his article quoted above is sometimes referred to as Cap, Fee and Rebate or simply Fee and Rebate.
The idea is to raise the price of fossil carbon products in a way that does not contribute to the profits of the companies that produce these products through a fee on fossil carbon at the point of importation or extraction.
The fee is then returned to the public in order to buffer people from the impact of rising prices and to enable them to purchase alternative lower cost non-fossil carbon based products as those alternative products are brought to market and / or simply to reduce their consumption of fossil carbon based products through conservation and lifestyle changes (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle).
Given a consumer driven economy and great disparities in wealth between the rich and both the poor and the disappearing middle class, anything that transfers money into the hands of people who really need it, is more likely to stimulate the economy in healthy ways, than if that money is left in the hands of the rich and powerful, who clearly have more money and power than they need, and are primarily interested in investing that money where they can make the most profit regardless of the consequences.
- -
P.S.
I know that indigenous people in Canada are resisting plans for a pipeline from the Albertan tar sands to British Columbia. As the artic becomes clear of sea ice what are the prospects of a pipeline from the tars sands to the Port of Churchill some 652 miles away (according to the GPS Visualizer, www.gpsvisualizer.com/calculators) on the Hudson Bay in Manitoba?
It more then a little likely that they will look to Churchill as a terminus. The difference being all the First Nations tribes in Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already signed treaties . Most in BC have not thus land claims issues remain an ongoing concern.
Yes I would LIKE to see a system wherein the full price of oil is paid for by the consumer without that extra amount flowing into the pockets of the Oil majors.
That all said you do see the problem? All across the US people are seeing wages eroded. Unemployment goes up. Ft McMurray drives a boom that sees unskilled workers able to make 60k a year. They can buy homes. They can send kids to University. Those plants all pay VERY high salaries.
Convincing the people that the loss of those Jobs and trying to end that boom is not going to be an easy thing to do.
GwNorth wrote:
It more then a little likely that they will look to Churchill as a terminus. The difference being all the First Nations tribes in Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already signed treaties . Most in BC have not thus land claims issues remain an ongoing concern.
- - - - -
My Question:
GwNorth,
Do you believe that the treaties the First Nations tribes in Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already signed with significantly strengthen their hand and be respected by the provincial and Canadian governments? Do you think the First Nations tribes there will stand firm against a tar sands pipeline?
* * * * *
GwNorth wrote:
Yes I would LIKE to see a system wherein the full price of oil is paid for by the consumer without that extra amount flowing into the pockets of the Oil majors.
That all said you do see the problem? All across the US people are seeing wages eroded. Unemployment goes up. Ft McMurray drives a boom that sees unskilled workers able to make 60k a year. They can buy homes. They can send kids to University. Those plants all pay VERY high salaries.
Convincing the people that the loss of those Jobs and trying to end that boom is not going to be an easy thing to do.
- - - - -
My Reply:
GwNorth,
Yes, I see the problem. There was a jobs boom when the Alaska pipeline was built too.
I do not begruged those now living in Ft. McMurray the good paying jobs that come with the exploitation of the tar sands, regardless of whether Ft. McMurray has been transformed for the better or for the worse, and it sounds to me like in many ways Ft. McMurray has been changed for the worse.
The lure of good paying jobs in the United States building and servicing the pipeline and at refineries on the Gulf of Mexico is cast as part of the argument for building the pipeline. But an even greater number of jobs than just those few good paying jobs in Canada and the United States cannot justify the violence and intense suffering that will come from the destruction of the biosphere to which the exploitation of the tar sands will so greatly contribute.
Neither Canadians nor those of us living in the United States should sell out life on the planet for any price, much less such a terribly low price.
A Fee and Rebate system like that supported by James Hansen is an important transitional step, which would place a premium on the price of the cost of fossil carbon that would not simply enrich those people in control of oil, pipeline and refinery corporations, would do far more to provide a healthy stimulus to the Canadian and U.S. economies and create jobs, and greatly discourage the exploitation of the tar sands as well.
One of the domestic political advantages of a Fee and Rebate system over a Cap and Trade system is that Fee and Rebate puts money in the hands of the people, buffers the economic impact of the fossil carbon price increase upon them that funds the rebate, and gives them a leading role in making choices among the clean energy, conservation, and changing lifestyle alternations that emerge.
Of course, large corporations largely control government and the media.
There are, of course, other ways to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Too often capitalists who claim they create jobs convince people that they can and will withhold the creation of jobs unless some ransom is paid.
In the United States we need to "beat swords into plowshares" and bring an end to empire. That will cost jobs too. But it must be done and the benefits to everyone will in the end far outweight the economic and environmental destruction and death caused by imperialism.
>>Do you believe that the treaties the First Nations tribes in Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already signed with significantly strengthen their hand and be respected by the provincial and Canadian governments? Do you think the First Nations tribes there will stand firm against a tar sands pipeline?
Actually no. Not when compared to those that have not already signed treaties. This the same reason that the Mackenzie River Pipeline was put on hold. This was first proposed way back in the 1970s. The Berger Commission looked into it and indicated that it could not be built until all of the First Nations peoples had signed treaties and had agreed to its construction. This lead to the Corporations pushing the Governments to get treaties signed. It still is not built. Some tribes are for it and others are opposed.
Many of those tribes demanded much more in the way of legal rights over their lands then the tribes in Manitoba and Saskatchewan had received in the firs treaty processes one hundred + years ago.
Manitoba and Saskatchewan have very impoverished tribes in the North and they might well compete to have a pipeline put across their territories in order to earn revenues. They would in fact compete against each other.
Just imagine you are of the First Nations and you can look back and see how the treaties implemented in Manitoba and the pitfalls. You can demand more to ensure the same does not happen.
Going through BC there is all manner of conflicting land claims. The Corporations do not like this. They do not want to build a pipeline then find it on lands granted to a First nations tribe after the fact.
Going to Churchill the claims are clearly delineated. They can just bypass reserves that demand too much or use existing treaty laws to force the pipeline through.
If you look at the article I linked to one of the issues is this very thing. When treaty 8 first signed Sifton indicated that the lands were likely never to be developed and the First nations people would remain hunters and trappers for evermore. Thus the only treaty obligation on the part of the Federal Government would be to protect the wildlife.
This is the only real card those tribes can play.
Given the division of Powers under our Constitution between Federal and Provincial Governments , the hand of the tribes that signed treaties the earliest is a weaker hand.
GwNorth,
Thank you for your detailed reply which unfortuately supports what I suspected might be true.
Thank you also for calling my attention to the link you previously posted in another comment in this thread. I found the Wikipedia article particularly interesting and discouraging because it covered more than just the Athabasca tar sands.
Here is the link again:
URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_oil_sands
in the current situation, jobs, good paying or not=slavery and acceptance of the new oligarchy as legitimate rulers.
GwNorth,
You were in Fort Mac in 1970? My hat is off to you. Only a small handful can claim that (I only arrived in 78 after the first boom was well underway) and that was when the town was a lot smaller and rougher. You probably remember folks like Karl Lietz who ran a chicken farm down near Gregoire Lake and Torchie Peden who had cows on the opposite side of the Clearwater. I worked for awhile at the Fort McMurray Oilsands Interpretive Center so I got to know the story of the place real well. Actually the history of Fort McMurray and how they came to discover the process of extraction is quite interesting. I rather enjoyed growing up there and think that in the post oil world, it will make the coolest ghost town around. :)
But I digress. Just wanted to give you a shout out. I do not often hear from folks who remember the smaller more interesting Fort Mac the way I do. I apologise to those who read this thinking there was going to be something relevant. :)
No apology needed Eccentric. I enjoy hearing something about what people like about a place where I have never been. That's particularly true when that place has an important role in the fate of all the rest of us. Hopefully, GwNorth will get your shout out.
Yes I recall the Pedens. I in fact graduated from the old Peter Pond High School when it was there towns only high school. I am not sure I recall leitz but I am sure if we threw names around I will remember many.
I think Hansen meant to say that the game is over if the entire deposit is mined, processed, and burned. The pipeline will speed up those things.
You are right Sheepherder.
And the longer it takes us to change course the more serious the damage will be to life on this planet.
Another thing that could stop it would be the contamination of the Oglala aquifier and the resulting habitation. You can't measure this in economic terms without a cost to
the environment. Environment= ability to sustain life. This isn't the Niger River delta, yet.
Here in Pittsburgh we ask "what's this tar sands stuff?" and turn on the Steeler game.
So, what's the plan when Obama signs-off on this bad boy and construction begins?
moonpie previously wrote:
They'll be plenty of time to deal and monkey wrench with this pipeline and plenty of bulldozers to actually "put your bodies on the line" in front of later.
Comment posted by moonpie under the article "I Will Be Sitting in Front of the White House" by Carol Smith.
Article URL: www.commondreams.org/view/2011/08/22-10
* * * * *
My Reply:
More civil disobedience, at least?
Excerpt from “Climate Disobedience: Is a New 'Seattle' in the Making?” by Mark Engler, TomDispatch.com, August 12, 2009:
In fact, arrests are piling up quicker than journalists can coin name-and-number nicknames. The Coal Swarm website keeps track of an ever-lengthening list of protests. New headlines now appear weekly:
"Activists scale 20-story dragline at mountaintop removal site in Twilight, WV"
"14 Arrested at TVA headquarters in Knoxville, TN"
"10 activists board coal ship in Kent, England"
"Activists shut down Collie Power Station, Western Australia"
In August 2007, Al Gore, Nobel-prize-winning author of An Inconvenient Truth, told Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, "I can't understand why there aren't rings of young people blocking bulldozers and preventing them from constructing coal-fired power plants." By the time Gore made that statement, some young people had already started blocking bulldozers, and many more, young and old, would soon follow.
Still, Gore can be excused for feeling that such measures were overdue. With global warming, perhaps more than any other issue, there is a disjuncture between a widespread acknowledgment of the gravity of the situation we face and a social willingness to respond in any proportionate way.
Article URL: www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/12
* * * * *
My Comment:
We probably cannot expect any civil disobedience from Al Gore, of course.
After all, Al Gore didn't show up at the White House with so many others to protest TransCanada's Keystone.XL oil sands pipeline this past week.
I think the Obama's hear fine, they just don't listen. American's love the president's kids, but what child of the president of the United States ever went on to do good works for people? Surely there must be one and someone here will remember one.
One W daughter went to Fox news (I think); Clinton's daughter married the son of an imprisoned billionaire; George HW Bush's son went on to be a mass murderer, just like his father; one Reagan son became a radio host and the other kids I don't remember; Nixon's daughters got married; LBJ's daughter did the same.
Amy Carter might be the exception. I remember she protested apartheid and got arrested with Abby Hoffman and she did other protests in the 1980s. Don't know what later became of her.
I would suspect that Obama's daughters will grow up to resemble him in many ways. In 20 years you can expect to see them somewhere high on the financial stage, oppressing their lessers.
Yes, and Dick Cheney's daughter Liz has made the rounds of main stream media as a pundit defending the abominal policies of her father.
So like if some of our top line environmental groups would like PUSH BACK with TV ads to counter the non-stop promotion of Exxon, etc. it would be much better than sitting in a ball in the corner wimpering about how much money the oil suckers have. Why don't they? Will the msm carry "Halt the _______!" ?
And Daphne's message is the right tool to make a dent in your friendly neighbor's sensibilities. I see anger in young people's eyes when you really get down to wa's goin on. At us, our generation. I remember that feeling from the 60's and 70's. And then tag - you're it.
Yes the opinion shapers have lotsa folks doin the Energy Panic Rag.
Don't stop the drills
Bring down the hills
We need all your votes
To elect a bunch of schills
Hey baby can't ya hear my engine hum
Those environmental types shore is dum
Talkin bout the climate like it was theirs
We take our cues from the people with the shares
You can;t stop it
Don't even try
Just grab your ankles
And kiss your ass goddbye.
It's not finished; feel free.
We say we love our children. The disenfranchisement of the American electorate has been masterful. We don't have a hair if we don't try to change that.