it’s buried page 4 of a 5-page piece in rolling stone by veteran writer bill mckibben where he lays out the basic, simple math of climate change. pretty daunting until amid bits about justin bieber and other celebs we find:
‘So pure self-interest probably won’t spark a transformative challenge to fossil fuel. But moral outrage just might – and that’s the real meaning of this new math. It could, plausibly, give rise to a real movement.
Once, in recent corporate history, anger forced an industry to make basic changes. That was the campaign in the 1980s demanding divestment from companies doing business in South Africa. It rose first on college campuses and then spread to municipal and state governments; 155 campuses eventually divested, and by the end of the decade, more than 80 cities, 25 states and 19 counties had taken some form of binding economic action against companies connected to the apartheid regime. “The end of apartheid stands as one of the crowning accomplishments of the past century,” as Archbishop Desmond Tutu put it, “but we would not have succeeded without the help of international pressure,” especially from “the divestment movement of the 1980s.” ‘
apartheid? i did that in the 80s, like over 25 years ago. gotta do it again?
one of my daughters visited me today. we talked about snorkeling and violence against children and what courses she might do in the fall–you know, normal stuff. hope it continues for decades. didn’t have kids 25 ago. hope to have grandkids in 25 years.
we seemed to have missed the boat , or are we missing the point? maybe instead of saving the world, with its focus on saving things, we’re to save each other, with its focus on saving relationships. too bad, tho, we can’t save the world too. or probably more accurately, let the world save us. maybe we still will. time’ll tell. by then, i’ll be long. so will you. jesus said, ‘love your neighbour as you love yourself.’ the love–or hate–is passed on.
moral outrage? hope bill’s wrong, but you do the math.