Sandy LeonVest

by Sandy LeonVest

“Anyone who isn’t cynical right now is either stupid or not paying attention.”

The quote above is not mine, nor does it represent how I feel. It does, however, articulate what I perceive as an increasingly palpable (and disturbing) attitude among some segments of the populous - apparently in response to the crazy times in which we find ourselves.  

I’m hoping this only reflects my experience, and does not represent a hard core ‘renaissance’ of cynicism. But it does seem to me that, right around the turn of the century (just after Bush 2 was elected), cynicism as a valid (even intellectually superior) position picked up steam.  

Today, reality on the ground, including the dismal state of the economy - from local to global - seems to be amplifying the phenomenon further, which, I guess, only makes sense.  “It’s hard to argue against cynics,” wrote good old Molly Ivins. “They always sound smarter than optimists because they have so much evidence on their side.”  Of couse, she’s so right. As a journalist, I can testify to that. Seems like the evidence supporting the cynics’ position is coming in by ever-bigger truckloads with each passing day.  

Yet, I think I prefer Oscar Wilde’s view of the matter. He once defined a cynic as one “who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” And perhaps Ralph Waldo Emerson, who once said a cynic “can chill and dishearten with a single word,” best reflects my attitude on the subject.  

The planet is in deep trouble - perhaps irrevocably. Humans across the world face a resource crisis of historic and unprecedented proportions. That seems as good an excuse as any for giving up.  But, to engage in what John Kenneth Galbraith called “the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness,” seems to me destructively self-indulgent. Unless one is looking for an excuse to give up, cynicism serves no long term purpose. It may be a reasonable position - for a minute. But the more relevant question is, “where do we go from there?”  

Toward that end, we would do well to keep in mind that cynicism is a luxury that primarily plagues the ‘well-fed classes.’ Those members of the global population who face the ravages of civil war, displacement, drought, disease and famine as a way of life understand that hopelessness is simply not an option when survival is on the line.  

For those of us who are still relatively privileged, I would submit that hopelessness is not an acceptable default position.  

So, how does one ‘remain in light’ in such dark times, without resorting to the (dangerous) comfort of denial? Or, in the Zen sense: Knowing we are surrounded by misery, can we still live in a joyous state?  I think the answer is ‘Yes.’ Here’s why:  

I am, by profession, a turner of stones, bound by a sense of personal and moral responsibility to consider many points of view and many facets of the same issue in order to make an informed judgment about how to approach a subject or a story. That may be why being an ‘activist,’ (ie: one who takes action) works so well for me. I find the process to be liberating and fulfilling , calming and exhilarating.  I love doing what I do, and I find it strange when people ask me (and they do), “How can you do what you do, day in and day out, and keep such a positive attitude?”  

The answer is simple: The more I understand about the rest of the world, the more I realize how fortunate I am to be who I am - and where I am. Democracy requires vigilance requires participation ... For my money, the US mainstream media and their ‘subscribers’ are obsessing over the wrong thing(s). Americans are about to discover that high gas prices - and even recession and/or inflation - may be the least of their worries.  

Besides, if a nice, long recession is what it takes to snap US policymakers out of their growth-induced trances, so be it. [Don’t miss reading NASA scientist James Hansen’s testimony to Congress in SolarTimes at www.solartimes.org.]   

As Dr. Hansen so elegantly testified this summer, the long-prophesied ‘tipping point’ on climate change will have been reached if major and substantive measures are not taken within the next year.   

There is no lack of awareness of an energy crisis in the public (or private) sectors. That is not the problem. There are some extraordinary, even visionary renewable energy projects going on locally and across the planet.    

The problem, as I see it, is that while the US media is fixated on rising gas prices, inflation and the flailing stock market, national and global institutions are essentially failing. The ‘dinosaur’ in the room is the growing sense that economic and social systems we have come to regard as ‘normal’ are stressed to the limit and, in fact, melting down.  
Seemingly disparate phenomena, from food shortages in India, Haiti, West Africa et al, to melting ice caps in the Antarctic have converged with overtaxed power grids and energy shortages across the planet. Accelerated climate change and a third-world population explosion obliges us to redefine ‘normal.’  
It is unlikely that the high fuel prices of the past several months are an economic anomaly. Even the US Energy Information Administration says ‘conventional’ world oil production peaked back in 2005, and the peak in all oil (including non-conventional sources like tarsands) is estimated to come in 2010.  
Still, my biggest concern remains the seeming inability of governments - large and small - to implement substantive changes in a timely way. The (relatively small number of) Megawatt renewable energy projects actually being employed today is a drop in the proverbial bucket when compared to what is needed - NOW.  
I am encouraged and inspired by California’s public commitment to leading the nation in the movement to mitigate extreme climate change. And I get as excited as the next person about the latest, greatest R&D, and the promising new technologies that are here now or in the pipeline. But, from where I sit, there still does not seem to be the kind of radical vision of the future and the bold leadership needed to enact the systemic changes that might insure such a future.  

California, to its credit, has set some laudable goals and has passed groundbreaking legislation with AB 32 (the global warming bill signed by Schwarzenegger in 2006).  

But even the California Energy Commission is concerned that many of the state’s emissions goals, ambitious as they are, will not be met within the projected timeline, and agencies like the California Air Resource Board are not always helpful, as evidenced by their April, 2008 ruling on Zero Emissions Vehicles. (See SolarTimes, SecondQuarter, 2008).  

There is much work to do - statewide and nationally.  

By 2050 (conservative estimates), the planet may well have more than 2 billion cars on the road - three times the current number. More efficient fuel economy can be achieved with mandates, such as the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards, or by higher taxes, but these are likely political non-starters here in the US. And no country has ever substantially increased its fuel economy (even with new technology) without also implementing tougher fuel standards, higher prices or both. Even Europe, with its high gasoline taxes (relative to the US), has mandates.  In 2007, Congress did finally pass a 35-mpg fuel standard after a grueling battle with conservatives in both parties. That will get the US to where the Chinese are now by the year 2020, and we will still lag far behind Japan and Europe. “No gasoline-powered car assembled in North America would meet China’s current fuel-efficiency standard,” noted the Toronto Star last year. And, dare I add, it may be time to abandon the internal combustion engine altogether.  

“To avoid dramatic climate impacts,” says scientist, Joe Romm, editor of Climate Progress, “The average car on the road will need to put out under one-fifth the emissions of current cars, or the equivalent of five times the miles per gallon of today.”  

And, as Dr. James Hansen points out in his Congressional testimony, time is not on our side. ... SLV