Where There is No Vision, the People Perish

December 8th, 2009

“Where there is no vision, the people perish” says the King James Bible in Proverbs 29:18. Certainly the people are in danger of perishing today. If not from wars and nuclear weapons, then from global warming. If not from that, then from a series of other threats. Could vision be what rescues us?

Admitting That We Are Out of Control

The Tao Te Ching says, “Clearing your vision, you become clear.” This advice does not refer to eyesight. It refers to the kind of vision that tells us what our life’s purpose ought to be and where we ought to be heading. Some people use the phrase “moral compass.” When we lose sight of what is really important and worthwhile in life, we are apt to go astray – eventually far enough astray to perish as a result.

Likewise, when a society loses track of where it wants to go, danger is at hand.

Our society has chosen to measure success in terms of material wealth, yet most of its religions warn against this course – and for good reason. Wealth is notorious among the wise for not being a reliable path to happiness. Enough wealth for comfort and basic security may contribute to happiness, but after that, wealth seems to bring more worries than happiness. Worse, wealth creates divisions between those who have it and those who do not, leading to destruction of community. Worse yet, the pursuit of wealth tends to blind its pursuers to the damage they do to our life support systems as they place profit at the top of their moral pyramid. As Paul Hawken says in his book Blessed Unrest, “Too much of a good thing is not a good thing.” Attempts to maximize wealth, pleasure, security or power — rather than to optimize them – lead to addictions, which are, by definition, compulsive and out of control.

Hope in the Heart of Chaos

The most destructive form of wealth pursuit is that which is done in the corporate framework. At one time corporations were chartered by states and closely regulated. The corporate structure afforded their directors some financial protection, but the price for that protection was giving up some of the freedom that non-protected businesses enjoyed. It was a fair exchange and the system worked. Now corporations are legally considered “persons,” though they have no conscience and do not die – two key characteristics of real persons – and they have slipped their regulatory leashes.

The poster child for a corporation run amok is Walmart, the world’s largest corporation, which has been roundly criticized for running its competitors out of business by engaging in predatory practices, especially with regard to its suppliers and its labor force. But even Walmart appears to be waking up to its own contribution to global unsustainability. It has vowed to triple the efficiency of its truck fleet – the largest in the world, has committed to convert its operations to 100% renewable energy, and is going toward a zero-waste system. To demonstrate its sincerity in these pursuits, it has enlisted the help of dozens of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

If a giant like Walmart can change course in response to a sustainable vision, why should it not be possible for us to transform other unsustainable systems in our society? Hawken says, “If we squander all our attention on what is wrong, we will miss the prize. In the chaos engulfing the world a hopeful future resides because the past is disintegrating before us.”

What Should Our Vision Look Like?

What we need is vision. We need to cast off the shackles of “the way we’ve always done it,” and loss of hope, and begin to imagine the world we really want to transform to. That word “transform” is key. Let us not think so much of “getting rid” of this or that. Instead, let’s adopt the paradigm that life itself places before us: don’t waste anything. Whatever is here should not be torn down. It must be utilized in new and sustainable ways to create what we really want. We will know what we really want if we allow ourselves to envision it.
I will suggest, following Hawken, some things I believe we can agree on:

1.    The golden rule is a good guide for how to treat one another: do unto others as you’d have them do unto you. Even better, might be the “platinum rule”: do unto others as they’d have you do unto them.

2.    All life is sacred. This does not mean that nothing will die or that nothing can ever be killed. It means that life deserves the utmost respect, care and reverence. If it must be taken, the gift must be repaid to life itself. Life can not be ripped off.

3.    Compassion and love of others are at the heart of all religions and are worthy guideposts in our search for right livelihood.

Again following Hawken, here are 3 rules to guide our visioning:

1.    The “cradle to cradle” concept calls for transformation of human industry through ecologically intelligent design so as to create systems that are not just efficient but essentially waste free.

2.    A corollary is the concept that waste equals food – every form of waste must be seen as the “food” for another system. This is how nature works. There is no “away” where we can throw that which we don’t know what to do with.

3.    As Buckminster Fuller pointed out, we must live within our ongoing solar income. Plundering the energy savings of the planet has turned out badly and is clearly unsustainable.

Let’s play our game of life not as a finite game that can be won or lost, a paradigm that is at the root of the world’s woes today, but as an infinite game where the object is to keep playing.

Press Release - Dec. 11 Climate Candlelight Vigil

December 7th, 2009

Press Release
Salem Climate Crisis Candlelight Vigil Dec. 11 at 5 PM
Release date: Dec. 7, 2009

Summary
The Social Action Team of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Salem, Oregon is holding a candlelight vigil on Friday Dec. 11 at 5 p.m. at the corner of Liberty and Chemeketa streets in downtown Salem. The vigil is part of a worldwide mobilization by 350.org, planned for mid-way through the Copenhagen climate negotiations. The climate talks will build to a head a few days later, as 350.org allies – environmentalists worldwide and people like President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives – struggle to get an agreement that represents “a survival pact, not a suicide pact.” Leaders of island nations have said repeatedly that their survival depends on the world getting back to 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide.

The Story
There is a candlelight climate vigil for Friday Dec. 11 from 5 to 6 p.m. at the northeast corner of Liberty and Chemeketa streets in downtown Salem. The Salem vigil is part of many hundreds of vigils worldwide planned by 350.org for the weekend of Dec. 12. The organization (350.org) takes its name from the parts per million (ppm) of CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere known to be safe.
Mohamed Nasheed, President of the Maldives has challenged all countries to act.
“At the moment every country arrives at the negotiations seeking to keep their own emissions as high as possible. They never make commitments, unless someone else does first.” Nasheed added. “This is the logic of the madhouse, a recipe for collective suicide. We don’t want a global suicide pact. And we will not sign a global suicide pact, in Copenhagen or anywhere.” (the full text of his short speech is at http://presidencymaldives.gov.mv/4/?ref=1,6,2469
Phil Carver, board chair of the Unitarian Univiersalist Congregation of Salem, is increasingly frightened about his grandchildren’s future.
“It is clear we have waited too long to act.” Carver said. “Waiting even one more year to begin large cuts in emissions increases the risk of planetary-scale catastrophes.”
Carver followed the science behind global warming for more than two decades as a policy analyst with the Oregon Department of Energy. He also organized a 350 mile trek to help spread the message about 350 ppm of CO2 in the air.
“We passed the safe level of 350 ppm of CO2 in the air in 1988. The level is now 387 ppm and rising 2 ppm per year,” Carver said.
Describing the connection between global warming, sea level rise and the impact on coastal towns around the world, Carver said “It is unfortunately too late to avoid serious damage from sea level rise. Oregon also faces increased droughts, floods and forest fires as the planet warms.”
He and others hope the vigil will motivate people to press for changes in federal policies, which could lead to global action. The limit of 350 ppm has also been endorsed by gubernatorial candidate Bill Bradbury and Lincoln City Mayor Lori Hollingsworth. New agreements to limit greenhouse emissions are still possible at the United Nations climate conference in Denmark in the next two weeks.
“What we do in the next few decades will affect the planet for at least a millennium,” Carver said. “If nothing is done to reduce emissions, many scientists estimate sea level will rise 6 feet this century, eroding over a thousand of feet of seashore in many places.
“This will continue for centuries.” Carver added. “The ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica will continue to melt and raise sea level for at least a thousand years. Once this process begins, reducing emissions will not reverse it. ”
For more information on the Salem vigil contact Carver at (503) 562-9878 or email him at philip.carver@comcast.net. More information on other vigils is available www.350.org.

Background
“In my work for state government, I was responsible for monitoring climate science until I retired this year”, Phil Carver said.
“Now is the time to stand up”, Carver added. “I am not willing to gamble my grandchildren’s future any longer.” Carver was also an organizer and walker of a 350 mile trek to build public awareness of the dangers of sea level rise and acidification of the oceans. Carver and Courtney Collins, both from Salem, walked along the Oregon coast and the Columbia Estuary. The walk and 14 scheduled talks along the way helped organize coastal support for worldwide greenhouse gas reductions.
They began on Sept. 20 at Sunset Bay State Park, near Coos Bay. They finished at a rally in downtown Portland on Oct. 24. Over a thousand people attended the Oct. 24 rally in Pioneer Square.
The walk and Portland rally were part of over 5,200 events organized by 350.org around the world on October 24. The idea of 350.org is to promote the 350 ppm limit that was first developed by James Hansen, a NASA climate scientist, and Bill McKibben, author of End of Nature and Deep Economy.
As they walked, Carver, Courtney and others meet with local residents at various events planned along the route. One event was a talk with Taft High School students in Lincoln City. Gubernatorial candidate Bill Bradbury and Lincoln City Mayor Lori Hollingsworth also spoke with the students.
“Lincoln City is committed to doing its part to curb global warming,” Hollingsworth said. “We would like our neighboring communities to make the same commitment.”
“The science is clear, the impacts of increasing wave heights are already being felt in our coastal communities.” Bradbury said. “Now is the time to lead our state, our country, with strong policies to reduce our carbon and address climate change.”
The 350 Oregon Climate Crisis Walk was co-sponsored by the Social Action Team of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Salem (OR), Oregon PeaceWorks and Oregon Interfaith Power and Light. It was endorsed by former Sec. of State Bill Bradbury and Lincoln City Mayor Lori Hollingsworth.

Science Notes
Recent research indicates that melting ice will likely raise sea level by 2 to 6 feet this century, depending on greenhouse gas emissions. Sea level rose at the rate of one foot per century since 1990 due to global warming.
If the planet warms enough to induce CO2 and methane emissions from the Arctic tundra and tropical forests, cuts in emissions from fossil fuels will not lower the CO2 level in the air. If large cuts are not made in the next few decades, sea level will likely rise 6 feet or more per century for the rest of the millennium. James Hansen, a leading climate scientist, notes a 15 foot rise this century is plausible.
Drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are needed to limit the rise to 2 feet per century. These cuts are likely close to the maximum achievable. To avoid increasingly dangerous climate changes, the world needs to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 from the rate in 2005. The rate needs to be lowered to 5 percent of 2005 by 2050. These cuts should bring the level of CO2 back to 350 ppm by early in the next century. Cuts in other emissions, such as methane, black carbon soot and nitrous oxide, are also necessary.
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri is the United Nations’ top climate scientist. He leads the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which every five years produces the authoritative assessment of climate science. Their last report, in 2007, helped set the target of 450 ppm of CO2 that many environmental groups and national governments have adopted as their goal for the Copenhagen meeting this December.
He now supports the level of 350 ppm. The level of CO2 in the air this year is 387 ppm and rising 2 ppm per year.
“As chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) I cannot take a position because we do not make recommendations,” said Rajendra Pachauri when asked if he supported calls to keep atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations below 350 ppm.
“But as a human being I am fully supportive of that goal. What is happening, and what is likely to happen, convinces me that the world must be really ambitious and very determined at moving toward a 350 target,” he told Agence France Presse in an interview this year.”
Even two feet of sea level rise this century will be a serious problem for most coastal communities. One foot of sea level rise can erode several hundred feet of land. Two feet of rise would affect about 700 million people worldwide. A rise of three feet would permanently displace at least 15 million people in Bangladesh, 17 million in Vietnam and 72 million in China. Several island nations will disappear. Six feet per century would be devastate nearly all coastal communities.

Science References
For a recent scientific assessment of global warming see:
http://copenhagendiagnosis.com/press.html
For information on the global impacts of rising sea levels see:
http://www.clima-net.com/docs/elibrary/articles/sealevel.pdf
For the most current synthesis of climate science see: http://climatecongress.ku.dk/pdf/synthesisreport
The discussion of sea level rise is on page 10.
For a more complete discussion of the science of sea level rise see: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327151.300
For an assessment of the issues facing coastal Oregon see: http://egov.oregon.gov/ENERGY/GBLWRM/GWC/docs/climate_ready_communities.pdf
For a technical discussion on predicting sea level rise see: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/
For the technical basis for the 350 ppm limit see:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0804/0804.1126.pdf

Update: 289 miles along Climate Walk

October 18th, 2009

As of Sunday, Oct. 18, Climate walkers have completed 289 miles of the 350-mile trek. They’ve talked to more than 100 people at a dozen meetings in towns all along the Oregon Coast. Thanks to increased awareness, many coastal towns now are organizing their own activities for Oct. 24, the International Day of Climate Action. Phil Carver and other walkers will finish the Climate Walk on Saturday by marching in to Portland’s Riverfront Park. To join, meet walkers at Cathedral Park, under the St. John’s Bridge at 9 a.m.
For more on Oct. 24 events, see 350Oregon.org

Climate walkers make the front page of Coos Bay newspaper

September 21st, 2009

For the Coos Bay article, click here

350 Climate Walk meetings posted as page

September 19th, 2009

The 13 public meetings for the Oregon 350 Climate Crisis Walk have been posted as a page on this blog. The walk begins Sunday at 9 a.m. from the Sunset Bay State Park campground south of Coos Bay.

Update on community meetings for the 350 Climate Crisis Walk

September 15th, 2009

Four new Oregon community meetings have been scheduled and one of the other meetings has a new time.

The four new meetings are in Lincoln City, Nehalem, Seaside and Clataskanie.
They are:
1 PM Sunday, October 4 at the Episcopal Parish of St. James in Lincoln City
3 PM Sunday, October 11 at the St. Catherine’s Episcopal Church in Nehalem
7 PM Tuesday, October 13 at the Bob Chisolm Community Center in Seaside and
7 PM Sunday, October 18 at the Clatskanie Presbyterian Church in Clatskanie.

The time for the Florence meeting has changed. It is now:
3 p.m. Sunday Sept. 27 at the Main Branch of the Siuslaw Public Library in Florence in the Bromley Room.

The other two meetings are unchanged:
7 p.m. Sunday Sept. 20 at the Java Jones Coffee House in Coos Bay
7 p.m. Thursday Oct. 15 at the Blue Scorcher Bakery in Astoria.

This week we will post a new page with all the meetings that have been scheduled, including the addresses.

Also, the Oregonian published the Carver Op-Ed on-line at 1 PM Wednesday Sept. 9. There are comments below the Op-Ed from Oregonian readers and three responses from Phil Carver. To see the Op-Ed and comments click HERE

Bill McKibben in Portland this Friday (9/11)

September 8th, 2009

Bill McKibben, author of “End of Nature” and “Deep Economy” is giving a seminar in Portland on Friday Sept. 11 at 1 PM and a public lecture at 7 PM. Both events are sponsored by the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon. For more information on the seminar see www.emoregon.org and look at the events section.

For information on the 7 PM event see www.muddyboot.org

Op-Ed sent to Oregonian

September 6th, 2009

Op-Ed
Why I Am Walking 350 Miles
Sept. 6, 2009
philip.carver@comcast.net

From Sept. 20 to Oct. 24, I and a small group will walk 350 miles along the Oregon coast and the Columbia River Estuary to highlight the dangers of climate change. For my last 20 years with state government, I was responsible for monitoring climate science. I retired in 2008 and now feel the need to go more public with this dire situation.

The Oregonian and most newspaper have missed one of the biggest stories of the year. Sharon Begley, Newsweek’s Science Editor, wrote an article on July 24 titled: “Climate-Change Calculus: Why it’s even worse than we feared.” In the article she quotes International Polar Year’s David Carlson as saying: “The models just aren’t keeping up” with the reality of CO2 emissions. She notes that: “Although policymakers hoped climate models would prove to be alarmist, the opposite is true, particularly in the Arctic.”

One of starkest shifts in the forecasts is sea level rise. Every five or so years all the climate scientists issue a concensus forecast. The group is called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2007 the IPCC forecasted that sea level would rise 7 to 23 inches this century. Sea level rose at the rate of one foot per century since 1990 due to global warming.

Lost in the headlines was an important footnote: the forecast did not include the effects of ice melting in Antarctic and Greenland. In March this year climate scientists gathered in Copenhagen to update the assessment for an important United Nations’ meeting there in December. In their Synthesis Report they state that “New estimates based on this approach suggest a sea level rise of around a meter (three feet) or more by 2100. Sea-level rise will not stop in 2100.”

Greenhouse gas emissions for the next few decades will affect the planet for at least a millennium. If nothing is done to reduce emissions, many scientists estimate sea level will rise 6 feet this century, eroding up to 600 feet of seashore in many places. James Hansen, a leading climate scientist, notes a 15 foot rise this century is plausible. Even a two foot rise would affect about 700 million people worldwide.

The Oregon 350 Climate Crisis Walk is one of over 1,000 events around the world planned for October 24 by 350.org. The idea to promote a limit of 350 parts per million of CO2 in the air. The level is currently at 389 and rising 2 ppm per year. The group was founded by James Hansen, a NASA climate scientist, and Bill McKibben, author of End of Nature and Deep Economy. McKibben is giving a talk in Portland at 7 PM on Friday Sept. 11. The seminar is sponsored by the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon.

Aug 31 Update on 350 Climate Crisis Walk

August 31st, 2009

An update on the Oregon 350 Climate Crisis Walk and the science of global warming.

Three town meetings have been set. They are:
7 p.m. Sunday Sept. 20 at the Java Jones Coffee House in Coos Bay
1 p.m. Sunday Sept. 27 at the Florence Library and
7 p.m. Thursday Oct. 15 at the Blue Scorcher Bakery in Astoria.

The walk has been endorsed by Lincoln City Mayor Lori Hollingsworth and Former Secretary of State Bill Bradbury. One or more press conferences will be scheduled for along the walk.

The issue of global warming is not going away. Climate scientists are increasingly concerned about the impacts from the current level of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the air (CO2 is 389 ppm and growing 2 ppm per year). Bill McKibben sent the following message on Aug. 25:

“Rajendra Pachauri is the U.N.’s top climate scientist. He leads the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which every five years produces the authoritative assessment of climate science. Their last report, in 2007, helped set the target of 450 ppm (parts per million of CO2) that many environmental groups and national governments have adopted as their goal for Copenhagen.

As you all know, that number is out of date. When Jim Hansen and other scientists looked at phenomenon like the Arctic ice melt of the last two summers, they produced new data demonstrating that 350 is the bottom line for the planet.

But it’s been hard to get that news out to the powers that be.
So today it comes as enormous and welcome news that Dr. Pachauri, from his New Delhi office, said that 350 was the number.

“As chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) I cannot take a position because we do not make recommendations,” said Rajendra Pachauri when asked if he supported calls to keep atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations below 350 parts per million (ppm).

’But as a human being I am fully supportive of that goal. What is happening, and what is likely to happen, convinces me that the world must be really ambitious and very determined at moving toward a 350 target,’ he told Agence France Presse in an interview.’“

For a list of the US and world leaders who have endorsed 350 ppm of CO2 as the safe CO2 limit see
http://www.350.org/350-messengers

Building a Better Strategy for the Peace Movement

August 21st, 2009

By Peter Bergel

Since I wrote “The Peace Movement Needs a New Strategy” (see page at the upper right), in June, I have participated in two dialogues on this topic. One was a brief exchange between members of the Afghanistan Action Network of national Peace Action; the other was a longer and deeper exchange among members of the Oregon Progressive Network. Guided by these exchanges, this article proposes some next steps, not only for the “peace movement,” but the entire progressive movement. After all, a true vision of “peace” would incorporate most, if not all, of what most progressives have been working toward.

I have also excerpted what I consider the relevant material from both exchanges and have posted that as a page at the upper right corner of this blog.

Where We Started

In “The Peace Movement Needs a New Strategy” I offered these critiques of current peace movement strategy and its results:

1. We are still using the social change tactics that we have used for decades even though they are proving less and less effective as time goes on. We have definitely lost ground over the decades I have been active.

2. We invest a lot of resources in public education and we have been effective in that area. Yet we have not figured out how to effectively transform public support for our point of view into access to the levers of power in order to create real change.

3. When it comes to action, we are devoting almost all our movement resources to lobbying and demonstrating, even though our success levels in those areas have been minimal in recent years.

4. We are mostly an anti-war movement, not a real peace movement.

5. We don’t place enough emphasis on pointing out the flaws in war itself and the mentality that supports it. Rather, we confine ourselves largely to criticizing particular wars and addressing particular weapon systems.

6. We have been ineffective at stopping wars once their advocates have built up momentum for them. However, we can anticipate future resource wars (over oil, water, food, land, and raw materials) as a result of global warming. Now is the time to focus on those and work to head them off.

7. Most important, we do not have a shared movement-wide vision of the peaceful world we are trying to create. We have no collective answer to the question, “if peace broke out, what would it look like?”

Two Initial Suggestions

In “The Peace Movement Needs a New Strategy,” I made two initial suggestions:

1. Use cultural work (film, music, theater, art, etc.) and social media (Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, LinkedIn, etc) in a planned and targeted way to transform conventional wisdom and public judgments toward support for a more peaceful, sustainable world.

2. Use the same tools to encourage transformation of the popular perception of war from seeing it as “wicked” (terrible, but attractive) to seeing it as “vulgar” (terrible and absolutely unattractive).

Further Proposals

After participating in the dialogues mentioned, I now believe that prior to discussion of broad strategy initiatives, we need to clarify where we want to be heading - that is, we need a broad, shared vision of the peaceful world we want to create. (See point 7 above.)

With that in mind, some additional proposals are:

3. Convene brainstorming sessions in a number of towns to which thoughtful people with backgrounds in social change work and other relevant expertise are invited to group themselves by sector and throw out answers to the question: “If peace broke out, what would it look like?” Record all responses and use them to develop a comprehensive and unified vision of the future. Sectors would include, but not be limited to: Conflict resolution — local, regional, global Defense Housing Energy production and distribution Food production and distribution Transportation & shipping Environmental protection Education Recreation Economics/business/merchandising Medical care/wellness Government Justice/crime/human rights/civil liberties

4. Create an independent think tank to digest this material and assist with the construction of the vision.

5. Organize a “Visions of Our Future” series of seminars during which knowledgeable people with relevant expertise are invited to present their own visions of how a sector of the future can function sustainably and lead discussions about them. This can be done all over the country with the intent of generating a consensus vision of where we want to go.

6. Review the visions already developed by the world community and enshrined in international law, including the UN and Nuremberg Charters, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Four Geneva Conventions, and a series of derivative international covenants that have evolved throughout the intervening years addressing a variety of emergent issues (e.g., nuclear non-proliferation, torture, prohibited weapons, terrorism, global warming) as well as watchdog institutions (e.g., Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, UN Human Rights Commission). Electing international law as a base has the advantages of (1) painstaking development by a broad multi-cultural array of scholars, attorneys and political realists, (2) endorsement by most of the 192 nations comprising humankind, (3) potential for implementation with the force of law supported by reliable evidentiary documentation, and (4) no need to sell it to a breathlessly awaiting world. These international standards are pretty much what we were all supposed to have learned in kindergarten: play fair; share with others; clean up after yourself; don’t take other peoples’ stuff and if you do, give it back; don’t hurt other people and if you do, say you’re sorry and make it up to them. (Thanks to Jack Dresser for this formulation.)

7. Focus more on motivating people than merely “educating” them.

Principles for Building a Powerful Strategy

Here are a few litmus tests against which we can measure the work we do in developing a new vision and strategy.

1. We must engage our adversaries on ground where we are strong rather than pitting our weaknesses against the strengths of our adversaries.

2. To do that we have to inventory our strengths - such as numbers, existing non-governmental work towards change, the tide of history, the self-preserving mechanisms of the planet’s ecosystem and our faith in basic human decency.

3. If a strategy depends critically on large sums of money to be effective, it will almost certainly be co-opted by our adversaries. They have a lot more money and are expert at manipulating it. Therefore we should seek strategic initiatives that do not require major funding or that can be funded by large numbers of people donating relatively small amounts.

4. We need to “think outside the box” in terms of both vision and strategy. We must free ourselves from the bonds of the status quo because we all know the status quo is not serving us well. Believing that we must continue to function within the status quo means hobbling our collective creative power.

5. Any major change will probably require a lot of time to be accomplished. This does not excuse us from beginning work on it right away. Responding from a crisis mentality has not, and will not, serve us well. Neither has devoting almost all of our energy to stopping something someone else is already doing.

Hopeful Signs

Many authors have noted that despite the grim threats confronting humanity on many fronts, there is already functioning an enormous number of small and large independent groups addressing a plethora of issues. Evidently a great many people understand that “something has to be done” regarding these threats. Pessimism is certainly warranted by the information science is serving up about the state of our world and our species, yet redemptive surprises have been experienced by almost everyone at some time or other in their lives. I think we have to take action with hope and determination and leave the rest in the Creator’s hands. We must do our homework and hope for a redemptive surprise.

“Doing our homework” is understanding and recognizing all the great work that people like ourselves are doing all over this planet in an effort to fix something that is wrong, damaged, immoral or could be better. And then we need to take that understanding and recognition and fuse it into a comprehensive vision that can guide our actions and reaffirm our connections with one another.