(Repost) Splintering Energies

Thinking about splintering of energies today.  I got on the internet this morning account I finally was told how to do some of the things you need to do to make Facebook a useable force for good.  Still learning, still wrestling with how, specifically,  I may be able to utilize this monster of a tool..

Anyway, in browsing I notice what a proliferation of good choices there are in organizations that do good things.  It’s potentially overwhelming I wonder if we don’t run the risk of spreading ourselves too thin.
True, there are a billion problems and a billion and two good ideas for how to solve them.  But I think our energies would best be combined, for there are only a few problems so threatening that the planet’s very survival depends on  our finding viable solutions quickly.  First let’s identify those, then concentrate our energies on them.
As a start, I propose population  control and climate change. Additional thoughts?
Please join the conversation.  Just share with your friends is all you need do.
Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to (Repost) Splintering Energies

  1. Hank Raymond says:

    Hey George, your comment boxes aren’t showing up correctly on Internet Explorer 7 for me. I switched to Chrome and they’re fine there.

    As a start what would I propose. Starting with “goals” I think you want “Climate Change”. And then under “strategies” I suggest population control and increasing the percentage of non-fossil fuel energy used on the planet. I keep seeing data on population that predicts population will peak in about 50 years. Is that what you see?

  2. Hank Raymond says:

    I tried to post a comment here a few minutes ago, but when I hit “post comment’, everything disappeared. I’ll try again. Hopefully I can remember what I said.

    First off, this page doesn’t show properly on my computer using Internet explorer 7. But I switched to Chrome and it’s ok there.

    As for where to start… I suggest you organize your thoughts this way. The “goal” is climate change. The “strategies” to reach that goal are things like “population control” I suggest adding the strategy “Increase the percentage of non-fossil fuel energy used on the planet every year” Also, lately I’ve been seeing many people say that population should stop growing in about 50 years. Have you seen anything about that?

    • George says:

      Hank:

      i think the two topics need to be treated as equals. Population because it drives all of our problems and, therefore claims first place all around, and climate change because it poses imminent danger of immense magnitude. Solving the latter has to be done immediately, or all is lost. But not addressing the former with equal success only guarantees the emergence of another threat very soon of equal or even greater challenge than the current climate crisis.

      I’ve seen the projections for 2050 leveling of population, but no credible (to me) explanation of what will cause it. It sounds to me much more like “we just can’t get to a larger population than that” kind of thinking. And that kind of thinking seems very shallow to me. It won’t stop the desperately poor from taking the only pleasure they have, nor deal with the economic presssure any reduction in poulation growth will bring, nor make governments that attempt to enforce population stability more stable. It strikes me as more wishful thinking than careful assessment.

  3. JoAnn Saccato says:

    Concentrating energies is a good thing, George. But, just as there are myriad problems, there are myriad solutions to each problem. I’m reminded of this quote by Rumi, “The truth was a mirror in the hands of God. It fell, and broke into pieces. Everybody took a piece of it, and they looked at it and thought they had the truth.” It helps me remember that i am only seeing one little piece, or fragment of the truth. Of course, i can only respond to that truth i see, as you and everyone else can.

  4. JoAnn Saccato says:

    Additionally, i can see there are myriad people and organizations working together on their ideas of solutions for the priority problems you propose: population control and climate change. Maybe the call should be for folks to move into action on either of those fronts in the stream of flow that attracts them most. Some may be on the ground in developing nations helping women with birth control, others may be working on an ad campaign in America for planned parenthood. There is a lot going on in these two arenas already. How can we help further what is going on, or if something is missing, how can we help bridge the gap?

    • George says:

      Excellent points, and I totally agree that we must all work where we are moved to work. But we should also be aware of the fact that too great a proliferation can diffuse participation.

      I once considered running for school board, because the political climate was ripe to unseat the incumbents. I decided not to for one, and only one, reason: the number of challengers to the incumbents had grown to the point that the opposition vote was becoming so split by worthy candidates that the risk of a standing office holder getting a plurality was becoming very real.

      The proliferation of good causes in today’s political arena makes it impossible to support them all, other than through lip service. I’m just suggesting we should each of us, recognize that and prioritize which we decide to engage in, and ,in any case, try to avoid starting another “cause” unless it is well removed from all existing causes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *