What If You Just Came Here From Another Planet? A Philosophy.

For many years, I’ve looked at the world around me through the lens “What if I just arrived on Earth from Mars? Does (place anything you want here) make any freaking sense? You often realize that the answer is clearly “No.”

For example, take climate change. Scientists are in almost unanimous agreement that human activity is killing the planet. Yet the issue has become politicized, so we refuse to take serious action to mitigate the damage even when doing so would transform the economy by creating millions of high-paying jobs and dramatically modernize our failing infrastructure. But one political party has convinced enough people to vote to deny that climate change is a serious threat and to maintain the status quo so that a few people in the fossil fuel industry can continue to extract billions from our economy.

Does that make any freaking sense?

Does it make any sense that our government can spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a failed weapons system, but we “can’t afford” to give all of our citizens access to health care? Does it make sense that we spend far more on health care than it would cost to offer our citizens universal care?

And the philosophy is useful for far more than political issues. Take our societal bans on nudity. Men can freely show their chests. But women must keep theirs partially covered. They can show their backs, their bellies their side boobs, their under boobs, their upper boobs, but they must not dare to expose their nipples in public! Why? Their nipples are little different than those of men. And they are necessary to provide nourishment for their babies.

Does that make any freaking sense?

How about our shipping container-based global trade? Scottish fishermen catch cod in the North Atlantic then bring them back to Scottish ports. But instead of processing the fish there, they load them into refrigerated containers and ship them to Asia where they are processed, frozen and shipped back to Europe for distribution.

Does that make any freaking sense?

Or what about commercial sea-going fish factories that sweep the oceans of all sea life, processing the species they want and killing those they don’t? The short-term benefit is cheap seafood. But the long-term consequence is the destruction of our ecosystem.
Does that make any freaking sense?

Or what about the clear-cutting of forests to make cheap, semi-disposable furniture? Or the destruction of rainforests and wildlife habitat to raise palm oil or cattle we don’t really need? Or using caravans of semi-trailers to haul merchandise coast-to-coast instead of more efficient trains? Or denying basic human rights to people based on a 2,000-year-old collection of writings of unknown origin? Or taking children from parents seeking asylum in our nation? Or by treating people differently based on their choice of religion, their language of the color of their skin?

Does any of that make any freaking sense?

When you strip away the traditions, the political labels, the myths and the prejudices, you quickly realize that much of what we do and believe makes no sense. No sense at all! Continuing to do something just because it’s something we’ve always done will only continue to perpetuate our problems. It’s time for change. Time to look at our actions and beliefs from an objective viewpoint – as if we just came here from another planet.

The very future of our civilization, indeed our species, may depend on it.

Should Climate Change Be Declared A National Emergency?

In order to prevent Trump from declaring border security a national emergency in order to fund his idiotic border wall, Sen. Marco Rubio noted that it would set a precedent that could wind up hurting Republicans saying, “If today, the national emergency is border security…tomorrow the national emergency might be climate change.”

He’s right about the political implications. But he fails to recognize the real dangers of climate change and the fact that it will hurt everyone, even Republicans. And he fails to understand that climate change is a true emergency.

According to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, we have until 2030 to reduce carbon emissions in order to avoid a catastrophic increase in global temperatures of 3 degrees Centigrade (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit). As of today, that’s 11 years! The study warns that we must make dramatic changes to limit the global temperature increase to no more than 1.5 degrees Centigrade (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).

The consequences for failing to act? In a word, disaster. Melting ice caps will raise sea levels displacing millions and causing mass migrations worldwide. Tundra and permafrost will thaw releasing millions of tons of methane and further accelerating climate change. Ancient organisms frozen in the ice and permafrost will be released perhaps leading to a resurgence of disease. Coral reefs will die creating famine for millions who rely on the oceans for food. Many of the world’s species of wildlife will become extinct. Much of the world’s farmland will become arid adding to the famine. And the changing weather patterns will create more numerous and severe storms.

Even if the human species manages to survive such conditions, the costs will be overwhelming. Mass migration and famine will lead to wars. And the financial costs will be unfathomable. The world’s 10 worst climate-driven events of 2018 killed thousands. And last year, in the US alone, there were 14 climate-related events – hurricanes, storms, floods and wildfires – costing 247 lives and nearly $100 billion.

Yet, despite the warnings, which become more dire by the month, the Trump administration has ignored them, even reversing much of the progress made in previous years and conducting a sell-off of oil leases on previously protected public lands. Indeed, we are now the only nation on Earth that is not part of the Paris Climate Accords. This is devastating for the planet, since the US ranks second only behind China in total carbon emissions. Per person, our carbon emissions are nearly eight times those of the Chinese! Yet China and much of the rest of the world are aggressively trying to reduce emissions, while only 20 states and a handful of US cities are doing so.

And, because the GOP has politicized climate science, in the US there is now a virtual media blackout of climate news. Many in the media consider it too controversial to report on environmental damage and, when they do, they try to present opposing viewpoints even though the science community is largely united that climate change is a real danger. As a result, only 45 percent of Americans say that global warming will pose a serious threat in their lifetimes. Seriously? How many of you don’t expect to live another 11 years?

Despite all of this, there is a bit of good news, the most promising of which is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. Unlike many of her colleagues, she is not only speaking out about climate change. She is offering solutions that can improve our infrastructure, lead to a cleaner environment and create millions of high-paying jobs.

Her Green New Deal consists of the following:
• Government-led investment in energy and resource efficiency, as well as reusable energies and micro-generation
• Low-carbon infrastructure redevelopment in order to create jobs
• A directed tax on the profits of oil and gas companies with proceeds being invested in renewable energy and energy efficiency
• Financial incentives for green investment and reduced energy usage, including low interest rates for green investment
• Re-regulation of international finance, including capital controls, and increased scrutiny of financial derivatives
• Curbing corporate tax evasion through compulsory financial reporting and by clamping down on tax havens
• A Global Marshall Plan Initiative using “green quantitative easing” to create money to fund the “great transition” to a society free of fossil fuels and other measures that aim to preserve the biosphere

Several of these measures have already been implemented in Norway, South Korea, the UK, Germany, even parts of the US. Progressive environmental groups like 350.org, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have also signed on. And the movement is gaining support. A recent poll found 81 percent of US voters support the Green New Deal ― including 64 percent of Republican voters and 57 percent of self-described conservative Republicans. In addition, more than 300 state and local officials voiced support for the Green New Deal. Numerous Democrats in the new Congress have also backed the resolution, along with a number of Democratic presidential candidates. However, the support from congressional Republicans and the Trump administration amounts to crickets.

But we can fix that. By voting for Democrats in 2020, we can make them scream.

Where Was Trump’s Concern For Unity The Last Two Years?

During his State of the Union speech, Trump called for bipartisan unity in order to move the country forward. In reality, it came across as more of a threat. He all but said, “If you don’t end the investigations into my campaign, my business and my administration, and if you don’t build my wall, I will refuse to work with you.”

Ignoring the threat, it’s telling that only now, after two years in office, Trump is reaching out to Democrats calling for an end to revenge politics. He certainly has made no previous efforts to promote unity. Indeed, he has attacked Democrats at every opportunity calling them names and questioning their intelligence or patriotism. One can only conclude that he is worried about what the investigations might reveal. After all, the investigations have already resulted in numerous indictments, convictions and guilty pleas of members of his campaign, his staff and his long-time personal attorney.

In addition, the ongoing investigations are likely to reveal fraudulent activity by his inaugural committee, his cabinet members, his business and his family. These investigations should not be considered vindictive. They are simply the result of justice and appropriate oversight.

The investigations aside, Trump and the GOP have some nerve calling for unity now. Where was the call for unity when Mitch McConnell and his GOP comrades announced that their primary goal was to make Barack Obama a one-term president? When they were determined to make his efforts fail? When they refused to hold confirmation hearings and votes on Obama’s judicial nominations? When they filibustered virtually every piece of Democratic legislation? When they held endless investigations into Benghazi and Hillary’s use of a private email server? When Trump and his supporters chanted “lock her up” during and after the campaign? When Trump made it his priority to undo and overturn virtually every accomplishment of the Obama administration? When he undermined the Affordable Care Act and rolled back environmental protections?

It seems clear that, despite the many Democratic efforts for bipartisanship, the GOP only seems interested in comity and unity when it serves their purposes and protects them from justice and oversight. Then, and only then, they are worried about revenge politics. And, too often, Democrats have accommodated them.

After Nixon committed treason by undermining the Vietnam peace talks and interfering with the 1972 election, Democrats let him resign and allowed his successor to pardon him. After Reagan committed treason by undermining the Iran hostage negotiations and illegally selling arms to Iran in order to fund the Contras in Central America, Democrats allowed George H.W. Bush to pardon those involved. And after Bush and the GOP took us to war in Iraq under false pretenses, Democrats let them off the hook for their lies.

This time must be different. Certainly, Democrats should work across the aisle in order to accomplish their campaign promises for the benefit of the nation. But they must not prematurely end the investigations. They must not abdicate their obligation to oversee the decisions of this administration. They must not bow down to this wannabe dictator.

And they absolutely must hold those who have committed crimes accountable regardless of the title before their names.

Where Are Those Patriots Now?

For many years, conservatives have portrayed themselves as some sort of super-patriots. They have displayed the flag and images of the flag at every opportunity – in front of their homes, on their cars, in the rear window of their trucks, on their hats and on their shirts. They have made a show out of saying the Pledge of Allegiance before every meeting. Like robots, they have recited “Thank you for your service” to every military veteran they meet. Without trying to understand the underlying cause, they have expressed their outrage at black football players who protested the treatment of African-Americans by kneeling for the national anthem. And they have told anyone who questions the decisions of our nation’s leaders, “If you don’t like it, leave.” (That is, except for when President Obama was in office.)

They have talked of American Exceptionalism as if the US has some divine right to rule the world. They have seemed to resent any foreigners who have crossed our country’s borders, especially if they are people of color or speak anything but English. And they have seemed all too willing to go to war with any nation that, in their view, doesn’t bow to our economic and military magnificence.

Most especially, these super-patriots despised the Soviet Union and totalitarianism echoing Ronald Reagan’s sentiment that its leaders “are the focus of evil in the modern world.”

My how things have changed.

We now have a so-called conservative in the White House who was put there with the help of Russian interference in our election. Since taking office, Donald Trump hasn’t even bothered to hide his affection and admiration for the Russian president – a former KGB member – who ordered that interference. And we have learned that Trump’s son, Don Jr., met with an Israeli company that presented a plan to use the interference of a foreign government to sway the election. As a result, it seems clear that the Trump campaign followed that plan in coordination with Russia.

In addition, it is known that members of the Trump campaign had at least 101 contacts with Russian officials during the campaign – several of them with the intent to set up a private back channel of communications between Trump and the Russian government. It is known that many of the campaign officials lied to Congress and the FBI about those contacts. And it is known that seven Trump campaign officials have been indicted or pleaded guilty.

It is known that Trump ushered Russian leaders and the Russian press into the Oval Office giving them classified information. It has been well documented that Trump has had multiple private meetings with Vladimir Putin. After the meetings, he collected the translator’s notes to keep the discussions secret. Moreover, Trump and his campaign staff are not the only Republicans with mysterious connections to Russia. It is alleged that some of Trump’s most ardent congressional supporters received campaign funds from Russian oligarchs which were apparently funneled through the NRA.

All of this is in addition to the many known financial connections between the Trump organization and Russian oligarchs.

It begs the questions: Why are those super-patriots not outraged by the Russian interference and Trump’s obvious obstruction of justice? Why are they not calling for Trump’s impeachment? Why do they even refuse to support any investigations into the apparent Trump-Russian conspiracy?

Obviously, Trump is pandering to them by giving them many of the things they have long wanted. They are thrilled with Trump’s nomination of ultra-conservative judges. They are pleased with his repeal of environmental regulations. They are happy to see Trump dismantle our federal government. And they are excited to see his hard-line response to his critics, the media, and people of color – most especially the immigrants seeking asylum from violence and crushing poverty in their own countries. But at what cost? Is any of that worth the damage to our electoral system? To our Constitution?

It’s time these self-described super-patriots consider the consequence of supporting a president who so openly cozies up to Vladimir Putin, a ruthless dictator who is obsessed with returning Russia to its former glory under the Soviet Union. They would do well to remember that Putin’s Soviet Union was our avowed enemy. A fact best expressed by former Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, who once said, “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!”

Given current developments, I fear he may have been right.