At a multicultural community gathering this past weekend, Jen’s explanation about the absence of clean natural water reserves led to highlighting the one bright spot: the top layer of natural watersheds can still be saved. Since humans need water to survive, this is kinda a big deal!
Ann, meanwhile, is getting ready to move to her next position in DC. The great bat die-off may not be absolute: some colonies in the northeastern US have managed (so far) not to contract the fatal white-nose disease. From what I understand, this is a big deal because we need bats to eat mosquitoes. Without a sufficiently massive natural predator, mosquitoes breed all out of proportion – leading humans (who reject discomfort) to increase the use of pesticides – which (by the way), poisons the top layer of the watershed.
Linkages
FEMA has ramped up considerably since Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans. As shocked as New Yorkers and other Sandy victims are with the proof of vulnerability, the number of domestic fatalities from Sandy stands at 109 (138 total to date), while Katrina claimed 1,833. Many of Katrina’s victims were poor, disabled, or elderly. Joan Sutton, writing for the Huffington Post, describes Sandy’s impact on the elderly: “Now, we see pictures of what is called a mountain of debris. Surely it is a mountain of heartache.”
Creative Design
If there was ever a time for creative strategizing at the global scale; this is it. We have to begin piecing together the scattered ecological bright spots, establishing institutional connections among them, and crafting scenarios that can guide the assessment of essential priorities and timelines. All of the things that need to happen (if we want to avert an ugly science fiction future) are not going to happen unless and until a comprehensive plan can be sufficiently sketched out – and we need such a vision of possibility soon.
It is always time for public accountability to progress, and – to date – there have not been enough of us in America thoughtfully considering how to solve this ultimate technological challenge. Roosevelt inspired Americans to prevail in World War II; Kennedy inspired us to the moon. Obama has not yet inspired America writ large, though the potential now exists. To succeed, we will have to learn how, as a society, to move together, better.
The technological solutions required by climate change will probably not be adequately addressed unless
1) such multicultural gatherings as this past weekend’s celebration of Diwali become more common, and
2) participants carry conversations about our knowledge from these safe multicultural spaces forward into productive, public dialogues.
There are people out there from all kinds of backgrounds with special and particular areas of expertise, like Ann and Jen, who are skilled in establishing relationships across social identity differences and equally capable of contributing thought leadership to the invention and implementation of creative scientific and political solutions for today’s complex problems. ‘Cuz here’s the real deal: human societies might somehow manage to do okay without bats, but if the top layer of the watershed goes? The game is going to get a whole lot rougher than it needs to be.
Thanks for spreading the “good word”. I think you are absolutely right. We have to affect change starting on a community level through constant communication, and take a serious inventory of our remaining resources. Maybe then we can start linking communities and ecosystems instead of global warming to human disregard.
One of the possibilities of this kind of conversation in online/public space, is making “confrontations” in a more gentle manner than might otherwise be possible. Or, making them in a broader way to a larger audience that is, hopefully at least partially receptive.
In the blogpost I emphasized the technology challenges of a changing climate, linking some trends in diminishing resources and extinctions with weather-related natural disasters. The context that occasioned the two conversations that inspired me (with Jen and Ann) was a multicultural event that we were privileged to be invited to attend. (At least I felt that way!)
Jen, your comment about “linking communities and ecosystems” embraces both points! And how odd you mention human disregard. Some days after the event, I was passing on the blog url to someone so they could read what I had written, and another person heard “blog” and engaged me in an exclusive conversation, essentially ignoring the presence of the person with whom I had initiated communication.
Given the observable social identities of those involved, it would not be beyond reason to assume that the white woman who interrupted us was somehow oblivious to the presence of the woman of color with whom I was talking. She also did not register my attempt not to be drawn into a separate conversation. I relied on non-verbal signals such as giving very short answers and turning my body away from her and toward the first interlocutor, all to nought.
She was excited, somehow, by the idea of the blog, and curious what I was doing with it. No problem! I want more of that kind of interest 🙂 But in the right ways, in flow with the other streams of communication occurring in the same space.
This isn’t the first time such a subtle yet obvious dynamic of discrimination has occurred so spontaneously in a casual encounter where I was completely unprepared for it. What could I have said in the moment? “I’m sorry, can we include _____ in this conversation too?” I couldn’t manage to conjure words quickly enough; nor did I trust begin able to keep my tone non-confrontational. Shaming someone isn’t, as far as I can tell, the most constructive way to inspire change – normally it elicits defensiveness. Sometimes, depending on the person, some folk will reflect and grow; but most folk (it seems), just retrench.
Anyway, thanks for commenting. I appreciate the engagement.