Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
It's very well written, stylistically, and I do agree with some of the points about the... questionable... nature of some of the UCP's more headline-grabbing platform planks. I certainly take the point about the rage that people seem to be motivated by in this election.
But this appears to be her central point.
This is wrong. Not that they deserved to lose, but that the "accident" somehow ignores that fact. The NDP were elected because they were an alternative to a government that deserved to lose - they happened to be there, so in its haste to get away from the corrupt PCs, Alberta pointed at them. They could have pointed at anyone. That's what's meant by an "accidental government".
I would prefer the term "cutting off your nose to spite your face government" as being more descriptive, but it doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well.
Also, I have an issue with this overriding premise.
Is it, though? A global effort? Because if we were simply signing on to a truly global campaign and doing our proportionate share of carbon footprint reduction I think everyone would be fine with that. The sense is that we're actually getting utterly screwed - it's a tragedy of the commons where we're the only saps who are going without, for the ostensible purpose of "setting a good example" that no one else is paying attention to. Meanwhile, internally, other provinces and certain first nations actors are effectively trying to cheat the system to prevent legal infrastructure from being built - people who are supposed to be on our team are breaking our own rules to shoot us in the foot. Worse still, nothing is being done about it.
Hence the rage. The anger, which is palpable, is about Alberta's perception of manifest unfairness, not some wild flailing-about at the changing realities in a modern world. Demand for oil and gas is going up, not down. The sentiment is reflecting a people who've had various feet on their necks for several years looking for someone to held them remove those feet, and start punching their owners in the face. And to hell with the consequences.
|
Did not virtually every country sign on to the Paris accord, with this exact stated goal? Are there not several multi-billion dollar mega corporations trying to sort out the next frontiers in energy, transportation etc in order to reduce that dependence and the consequences of current trends in emissions?
Is there any doubt that dependence on carbon will be intentionally reduced over the next several decades? Big picture.
That's not to say targeted efforts to hamstring our particular energy production isn't unfair and worthy of indignation and anger. I am angry about that.
But what actually keeps me up at night is the long term - what are we actually doing to prepare for a world that will inevitably need less of our product? What are we doing to be a part of that transition, not
only fight against it. Who is talking about this?