TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Hernando Today

Heated Politics, Global Warming And Other Incendiary Issues

ADVERTISEMENT

By JOHN REINIERS

In My Own Words

Published: May 22, 2008

We Americans have become a more cantankerous, quarrelsome lot in recent decades. Is it because of politics or our culture, or are we just grumpier? Politics is divisive by its very nature, but in recent decades, it's become a zero sum game.
It may seem impossible, but we manage to turn every conceivable issue known to civilized man into political partisan warfare. My absolute favorite is global warming. The seminal moment for me was when I lived in Richmond, Va., in the 1970s and inadvertently had overlapping subscriptions to both Newsweek and Time magazine. After some research, I discovered it was in its June 24, 1974, issue, that Time reported that experts were "becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age." On April 28, 1975, Newsweek reported in a piece called "The Cooling World" that "There are ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically…changes may portend a drastic decline in food production…The drop in food output could begin quite soon…" Even the New York Times reported on May 21, 1975, "A major cooling is widely considered to be inevitable."
What is remarkable is that when we talked about global cooling in my office in the '70s — it was not a political event! In fact, during the hundred years or so of scares by the experts about global cooling or warming, the issue did not become "political" until the "Gore" era. My inclination is to go with the "cooling" school of thought, but we'd be stupid not to endorse reduction in carbon emissions, etc. that the "warming" crowd recommends.
All serious studies examine the cyclical changes in weather over the millennia. One apolitical team of experts recently reported — and most students learn some of this in school — "Despite the current relatively warm climate on Earth, regular recurring epochs of glaciation have dominated the planet for the past million years. Ten times, glaciers have advanced and then retreated … with corresponding warmth … lasting …10,000 years. The earth has been in a warm period for about 10,000 years now." Just this year, NOAA reported we had the coldest winter since 2001. Gosh, I thought our time was up in 1974.
I don't know what to believe anymore, other than this should be a debate among scientists; not a political event. Things are getting so looney that the founder of the Weather Channel is threatening to sue Al Gore for fraud.
The media and the Internet are probably the most responsible for extreme partisanship and polarization — particularly cable TV, radio and bloggers. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the blather seems to be more contentious, rather than reasoned debate.
Before talk radio, all media were liberal. The problem was they didn't realize it. The public didn't see, read or hear conservative viewpoints. Now that the traditional media have no monopoly, this probably irritates their sensibilities and makes them more dogmatic. At least now all the major networks and print media admit they favor liberal policies. In pretalk radio days one could only listen to commentary on National Public Radio going to and from work. So much of its material was so far left of center, or blatant propaganda, that I would switch to FM music. Nowadays we can hear news or commentary 24/7 from an endless variety of sources.
Another not so subtle change in our culture is the drift to the left in first-world countries away from religion; now being labeled "secularism." Europe's churches are empty museums. (Europeans are now predominantly post-Christian secularists.) The official policy of the United States is to endorse secularism in government, hence our conflict with Islamic fundamentalists who seek to restore the caliphate, fusing Islam and the state into a fascist ruling theocracy. (Think of Iran.)
The change I mean is the inclination of the left, and our youth to look to Europe as a model, and to attack religion, rather than simply viewing it as a nuisance, as in the past.
This debate too is getting a bit acrimonious (George Bush has unintentionally exacerbated this attitude by being a devout Christian.) The "non-believing" left wing of the Democratic party see Christians as being anti-homosexual, pro-life and committed to moral values. Prior to the counter-culture movement of the '60s, these issues were usually discussed at home with parents or behind doors in the many churches and other places of worship. Nowadays these issues are discussed in the media, probably because the "secular" have nowhere else to vent their views. The media are the pulpit. And I think it is fair to say they are predominantly "secular" as well as liberal.
In my view, cultural issues — "moral values" — still pre-dominate the political discourse — not the war. It's been that way since the '60s. The economy is a moving target. Liberal Democrats are by nature dovish, and believe naively that the absence of war is peace. (So did Neville Chamberlain. Hitler was grateful.) Let's be frank and go back to our founding as a country. A majority of Americans — some guess as high as two thirds — did not support our war for independence. About a third was loyal to the Crown; and about a third didn't want to fight for anything, and only a third was willing to fight for freedom. (See David McCullough's best seller 1776.)
Edmund Burke, a British statesman (1729-1797) said it best: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for enough good people to do nothing. The only thing necessary for the triumph of good is for enough good people to do something…"
Nothing has changed since then. Evidently, one third is enough when it comes to war, but it takes more than one half to make a culture. And we're still arguing about it.

John Reiniers, a regular columnist for Hernando Today, lives in Spring Hill.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT