Global warming activists have diligently pursued their cause for a number of years now, but to what end?
Emissions have reportedly increased significantly during that period, suggesting that the results have been negligible.
Does it really help the cause, worthy as it may be, to shut down a bridge for 12 hours or conduct a surprise snake parade through downtown Vancouver disrupting the lives of untold numbers?
How many people were late for work, missed airline flights or medical appointments?
How many were imperilled by delayed response to emergencies by first responders?
Surely no one believes that demonstrators have endeared themselves to the people whose lives were seriously disrupted and possibly harmed in some way. Does this promote the cause of global warming reduction?
While the rights of free speech and demonstration are enshrined in our democratic system, clearly such rights cease when they negate the equally enshrined rights of others to freedom of movement and safety.
Deliberately denying these rights seems an inappropriate way to promote a cause.
Since close to 70 per cent of world pollutants emanate from six governments – China, U.S., European Union, India, Russia and Japan –they are essential entities in addressing this impending threat to our very existence.
Unfortunately, they and many others only pay lip service to impotent climate accords. It’s past time to get serious with these self-serving, audacious power houses.
(At the time of this writing, the United Nations issued an alarming report that emissions are increasing at an alarming rate and that our timeline for action is in severe jeopardy. More cause for urgent, decisive action.)
If we are really serious in dealing with this ubiquitous mindlessness, there must be a multinational, worldwide, enforceable decree to regulate out of control contamination of our climate.
Noncompliance must have serious consequences. Anything less will fail.
Global warming activists could effectively contribute to such a program by demonstrating at embassies, legations, and consulates of the six leading polluting countries.
Such tactics, which challenge their worldly image, are quickly noted by home countries.
That and similar pressure at local Canadian government establishments would also likely be more warmly received by the general public than blocking roads and bridges in Vancouver.
Tom Linning
Penticton