I found the article above by Professor Denis Rancourt to be quite provocative and sent him the following response:
Professor Raincourt,
I just read your blog post http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2007/02/global-warming-truth-or-dare.htm l found it an interesting read.
It is clear that you are much more than a "layperson" as you discuss this topic. You have done considerable research and know how to write a readable article.
I am of the opinion that some aspects of climate change are attributable to an anthropocentric source. However, I accept that, as a "layperson" I am out of my depth in discussing this with you on a scientific basis. My rather "simplistic" notion is that I find it very difficult to believe that the massive increase of human population and the subsequent large scale increase in emissions would not have some form of impact on the earth's climate systems. Maybe I am naive, but I note that it took over a million years to sequester carbon in oil and coal. It was, in the human time scale of things, a fairly lengthy process. We, as humans, have managed to release into the atmosphere roughly half of it in, essentially, the blink of an eye of time. Call me crazy, but it seems to me it would have an effect.
However, I believe that all of this debate about whether or not humans are influencing climate change could be all so much navel gazing. A much greater problem we need to confront is disengaging ourselves from our over consumptive ways. Since the first oil was commercially produced in 1859, we have become addicted to ever cheaper energy sources. This has been finessed and exploited by the corporate elite into the vision and promise of infinitely increasing consumption, culminating most recently in globalisation.
So, yes, you and I are in agreement regarding the concentration of wealth and power in the corporate elite, etc., etc. Where I take issue is what I regard as your dismissive attitude of personal action. You mock those who work on reducing their consumption, and suggest that it would be much better if they became more activist in taking on corporatism and the status quo. I don't disagree with becoming more directly active in one's community, and part of that can involve challenging>corporate practices. However, I do believe that making conscious consumption choices is also very much a part of direct action.
I firmly believe that we need to do both. People vote every day with the dollars they spend. Wal-Mart thrives because people shop there. Yes, we need to challenge corporate practices. However, we also need to constructively and creatively challenge those who support their practices by doing business with them.
The root cause of the over consumptive globalisation mess we are in is the fact that the vast majority of people are buying what the corporations are selling. Corporations have convinced so many of us that what we need is quantity of life instead of quality. While challenging the corporate mentality, we also need to challenge the citizenry to accept their role in changing the world. From blockbuster entertainment, closets full of clothes that we don't wear, constant vacationing, to foods from all over the world, we are constantly being sold a bill of goods. The best form of direct action is to recognize the extent to which we are perpetuating the consumer oriented economy. If we don't buy it, they don't produce it.
All of this is going to come crashing down on us soon. Once again, I only have the "layperson's" perspective, but I believe there is considerable evidence pointing to the crunch of "peak oil" hitting us very soon. I find www.energybulletin.net to be very useful. You might want to confirm your source that suggests we have coal supplies to last for a thousand years. There is considerable evidence to the contrary. However, that is another discussion.
In summary, I disagree with your climate change assertions. However, I believe such a point is likely moot, in that the larger problem is societal over-consumption of material resources fanned by a $450 billion annual marketing budget. The best form of direct action is to cut off the food source for corporatism, namely work to reduce over-consumption of material resources by convincing more people to understand that we have been hoodwinked to pursue quantity of living rather than quality of living.
Finally, I believe that a curtailment in the availability of energy resources that will happen within the next few years, (if it already hasn't started), will lead very soon to the most difficult challenge humankind has ever faced. Mainstream society hasn't even begun to recognize the immensity of this issue. It will, however, have a dramatic impact on most people's lives.
Thank you for providing your perspective. You have challenged me to respond.
