I was disgusted. I grew up trained in critical argumentation. When I used to debate it was mostly a simple case, even in the more complex rounds of "Win the arguments, Win the debate" that doesn't happen here. You can cream the competition and still lose. A person with little expertise, or savvy in the language and intent of legislation can form a barely articulated position of opposition and the bill will be dead.
There is the possibility that a watered down version of the 2nd bill will pass, and at first that pleased me. But I was talking to some activist energy folks about that and they said it would just be better to say that the majority party killed all energy efficiency legislation. Why pass a bill that does nothing (and it looks like the bill is getting close to a complete removal of any significant mandate)? I'm not sure, perhaps a small step will get these guys closer to the edge--either pushing them to realization (unlikely) or pushing them out (all I hope for right now).
So which pathway is it? Do we hold firm to our standards, insist that legislation remain potent and true to its intent or do we compromise and find satisfaction in symbolic tiny steps towards recognition that there is a severe energy crisis (statewide, nationally, globally)? Idaho is already behind, already moving backwards by virtue of not moving forwards...soon there may not be a choice, soon we may not be left with a chance to change policy...because we will be searching for modes to power our lives. The comfort zone will shrink, options will be limited, resources scarce, need will outweigh civility. I don't know how far away this is but it feels close.
Maybe I am watching the reels of a movie whose plot and moral has already been filmed. The final reels of a story whose historical significance has already found its place. The voices fade, the color recedes, this is the final chapter, the frame repeats...repeats, shudders and is gone.
2 comments:
The question of whether to accept incremental change is always a difficult one to make.
"Separate but equal" was marginal progress, which led to years of additional oppression. It was a polarizing enabler of bigotry, and helped cultivate the unofficial caste system which is, to whatever degree, still intact today.
By contrast we can look at the controversy during the 90's (I think it was the 90's) over the naming of sports teams after native American tribes, etc. While this effort could be looked at as a failure (see the Redskins, Braves and Indians mascots still around today... especially the Indians iconic image); the awareness momentum garnered by those efforts resulted in a positive flow of consciousness toward the discontinuation of the reinforcement of negative stereo-typing (say that 10 times fast ;).
Long story made longer... the question I think one needs to ask is this... "If we accept incremental change here, is it going to generate momentum toward out objective or away from it". If the answer is away, then I would not accept a defeat in compromise's clothing.
"If the answer is away, then I would not accept a defeat in compromise's clothing" (sbj).
I love this.
And a complete tabeau around insisting on non-discriminatory language based on the accusation of political correctness. Is any victory without defeat?
But the momentum is certainly key. Which Is To Galvanize.? That is the question. What pathway leads to the over/under/through pass? Yes. Very nice.
Only in this particular instance: 1) I actually have zero control. I assist policy makers...I can influence them...I support their endeavors...But I do not make the call. 2) They passed the Resolution today to explore alternative energy options for economic gain. A resolution. No teeth, no mandate. Not a priority. Enough of the Resolutions...I want a Revolution. ! Am I really asking if I keep resolving to do something am I going to get there without doing it?!...No momentum there. But in this state it feels like that is all there is. Do you realizes that something like 15 of the last senate seats were unopposed!? That is where the difference will happen (one of the many locales to galvanize). That is where the momentum will start. Should start. Until then, they can resolve all they want...but we are going nowhere on this issue right now. How do you move within this frame? You change the frame.
Post a Comment