I have stayed up so late the past three nights that I can't see clearly. I stumble through my homework, job applications, readings, preparations with my eyes half closed, my vision blurry through my dry lashes. The yellow light my overhead light gives off makes it seem later anyway... so I pull through that work that just keeps coming, only to awaken before 8 the next morning for more.
I haven't been this busy since this time four years ago. Every day is 20 waking hours long (to steal a phrase from my more articulate friend) and while I don't really mind the things I fill these hours with, it'd be nice to sleep.
I went to see 20/20's John Stossel speak tonight. And while my views are not in line with his libertarian outlook, it was refreshing at least to hear something different. College students are fed a diet of liberal(itarian) in classes, from speakers, and reading the newspaper. I don't realize how tiresome it all gets, this academic, optimistic, but generally worthless tone all college discussions take. So there was a liberal kid or two in Stossel's audience (not including me the fly-on-the-wall journalist), and one of them asked during question and answer how America came to have a 40-hour work week. I think he was getting at labor issues that are big around here this time of year, but Stossel started talking about how Americans have the freedom to choose the length of their work weeks... which could lead me (and led him) into a long discussion of money and the economy. But I guess my point is that it's what i've chosen, this 80-hour work week, and regardless of whether i'm making the economy healthier by my decision to work, it generally occupies me -- makes me happy.
I think, however, that my year on the newspaper staff has taught me one thing that's not necessarily positive: to hate activists. Two years ago this time I went to a protest of the war in Iraq, a protest I now wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. The activists I deal with daily are, for the most part, fairly ignorant and not picky about what they're protesting. So we get this large group of people who lead every rally just for the sake of parading around campus and yelling and who love to spout facts that are almost true at best. And though I love the environment, it's these people who pitch stories to me every week that make me hate the concepts of sustainability, going green, climate neutral, and especially global warming. I haven't yet seen An Inconvenient Truth, but Stossel made a point I found very compelling: years ago, the catchphrase on everyone's tongue was global cooling -- what happened to that? We love to be scared , but mainly, if we can't predict the weather, how can we predict climate change? It's important to look at, important to take steps to curb the harm we're doing to our environment, but it really is a ridiculous fad that's receiving far too much publicity, from my paper included. He also seemed to think the Prius is a waste of time, but then again (as he said) he has the money to pay $10 per gallon for gas (as opposed to the rest of us -- and me, whose car is broken).
I can see it happening already. If I spend most of my life in journalism, i'm going to come out the other end much more cynical, still hating activists, and quite possibly believing in decreased regulation of government -- like the good conservative I... am?
About Me
I am currently adrift in Chicago, Illinois. I have also lived in and blogged about Santa Barbara, California and Seville, Spain.
Check out my archives!
Check out my archives!
4 comments:
Until very recently, climate change has been a terribly under-appreciated global crisis. I would love to believe that global warming is only a fad, but fads pass and fade over time. While there is uncertainty invloved with predicting the future of climate, all scenarios confirm that global warming is unequivocal, and we can expect global rise in air and water temperature, melting of snow and ice, and sea level rise (cited in the IPCC Fourth Assessment). As we begin to witness these changes in Earth's climate system, as global oil supply is exhausted within this century, as water resources are depleted, climate change will continue to be covered in the media. It deserves to be covered by the media. It's unfortunate and true that media and activists often times dilute facts, but here's hoping that hiden in all the propoganda is some underlying message which will spark interest and increase awareness.
Yeah, I gotta go with Debbie on this one, and I hate activists too (to a certain degree... they just simplify things too much). I guess it's because I'm a huge science nerd, but I think this guy either doesn't understand or won't pay attention to the increasing amount of CO2 that's in the atmosphere and the insulating effect that this increase has on the warming of the Earth, among other scientific evidence of global warming. Yes, I agree that this whole policy of scaring people into action is ridiculous propaganda. I think that if we show people that this isn't as simple as an activist slogan and put the science in terms that everyone can understand and believe (which shouldn't be too hard, I have faith in the intelligence of other people), I think that the whole message behind global warming could penetrate into the public's conscious a lot better. Of course, that could just be the idealistic, optimistic liberal inside of me talking.
-Jen (I hate blogger right now)
Though there is a lot of publicity, propoganda really does work. Though in past wars and conflicts it was used to turn people against the enemy, maybe it works to spark people to do something good.
I was reading an essay the "Dialogue between Civilizations," written by a special group of philosophers, theologists, and politicians from about 20 different nations. It was calling for a, well, dialogue between civilizations for the sake of the impending environmental, political, and spiritual doom they predicted would befall the world if we continued to be as divided as we were in the global community we are becoming.
The paper I had to write in response had to comment on the contributions that a Confucian view would make to the discussion and what it would take to unify the world in some way or other. I talked to several people and they all felt that the world would only unite if it were against a common enemy: Martians, for instance--or global warming.
Although for the sake of my paper's Confucian argument I had to explain that uniting against something rather than uniting in the name of our common humanity was "sooo Western;" perhaps there's something to it. Perhaps global warming, as it approaches doom level, will drive the world toward some common goal and thus toward cooperation, at least on some level. If there is no dialogue between civilizations and the U.S. and China keep being economically savvy assholes, I guess we'll just have to wait until it finally becomes profitable to be enviro-friendly (and I think it will--though I don't have the evidence to prove it).
Post a Comment