By John Klein (aka Saskboy)
The Prime Minister infamously implored people to not “commit sociology” when Chechen-American thugs blew people up in Boston. The PM’s point was that he didn’t want people analysing the root causes of terrorism, out of supposed respect for the distant victims.
With another deadly tragedy playing out in Alberta, there is a chorus of complaints from people both local and quite distant from the disaster, asking others to not talk about why Calgary was subjected to a massively uncommon flood.
A really tiresome meme amongst climate change deniers is the one where they insist that someone can’t seriously understand climate science and be concerned about it if they participate in using modern technology (which happens to be harmful when mass-produced and mass-used).
Is it hypocritical? Possibly. Is it understandable, and necessary in order for environmentalists to spread their ideas on a level playing field to Deniers who use cars and the Internet and get on TV? It’s essential.
The Canadian political movement that made climate change denial a centrepiece of their economic ideology was born out of Alberta. You’ll have to forgive some Canadians who conflate all prairie dwellers with climate change- denying rednecks who all work for oil companies, vote Conservative, and don’t give a damn about the consequences. Westerners tend to make similarly unflattering assumptions about people from southern Ontario all voting for crackhead mayors, and that’s not fair either.
There’s also a host of extremely sensitive people on Twitter right now insisting that talking about climate change in the context of the disaster in Alberta, is tantamount to “victim blaming.” What utter nonsense that is. Not all Calgarians are innocent victims. All deserve emergency support, of course, no matter their political views, obviously. But people living thousands of kilometers from a tragedy should not be told they cannot talk about the root causes destroying cities by natural disasters.
People who’ve built a city around an oil industry that actively denies climate change are not entirely innocent victims. Building in a flood plain, you take your chances, an idea supported by Canadian home insurance companies which refuse to provide insurance. If there were areas heavily logged upstream, that could have been a mitigating factor. Damming waterways? The list of possible factors is long, and will have to be considered very soon, before efforts to rebuild take place after the clean-up.
Does someone want to jump all over a Calgarian too?
Calgary’s water restrictions should be a great opportunity for people to change their overall water habits. Take short showers (about one song long . . . no Meatloaf tunes) and every other day if you are not a sweaty mess. Run the dishwasher full. Water your lawn only when it needs it (it doesn’t need it after a month of rain). There are so many other ways to save water now. People’s challenge is to change their mind set to keep these new habits long into the future.
Poor, Unethical Ezra gave this activist, Dr. Berman, a bit of heat on Twitter too:
What’s her statement (about the tarsands) when people tell her “It’s a tragedy”?
“No. A tragedy is a problem without a solution. A problem with a solution that is not being acted upon is not a tragedy, it’s a scandal.”
Deniers & Ethical Oil hacks have used lack of major apparent climate crisis in Canada, as fuel for fossil industry growth. The truth can’t take a vacation during a flood.