For once I agree with republicans. Watching the latest debate (because I’m a glutton for punishment), the journalist’s questions often exposed their ridiculous desire to stir up controversy by pitting one candidate against another (e.g., asking Huckabee if Trump had the moral authority to unite the country), instead of discussing issues in detail. If Trump lacked moral authority a proper debate would reveal it. Ironically, however, they got what they deserved. A stage full of strict capitalists were asked unprofessional questions by a capitalist-based media hoping to cause an uproar for entertainment value to increase viewership and thus advertising dollars.
If you want a professional debate, don’t ask capitalist-based journalists to moderate it. Instead, put together a panel of experts, consisting of economists, geopolitical specialists, military analysts, maybe a philosopher to inquire about basic mindsets in certain situations and, god forbid, a scientist or two. If that’s considered too difficult for them to handle and professional journalists are preferred, have it run by PBS or NPR. That, of course, would never fly in a republican debate because such an intellectual approach would be considered even more liberal than what they accuse the mainstream media of being.
Especially since they’d probably ask about climate change.
Only one candidate, Governor Christie, was thus questioned, apparently because he’s the only one willing to acknowledge the issue. He discussed it quickly and wrongly (it’s my understanding that New Jersey’s success in solar production is actually attributed to his predecessor not him, and that neither Obama nor Clinton have increased or proposed tax increases to deal with the issue, as he claimed). Nor did he discuss it as a serious issue effecting every aspect of life on this planet, but instead as a small annoyance that could easily be dealt with through energy policy. The others listened politely without disruption or any desire to chime in, and so the subject was quickly dismissed and forgotten.
Maybe because it wasn’t even a serious question. It was asked primarily to show him as a republican outlier compared to the other extreme right wingers, not for any intellectual discussion, and to ultimately, hopefully, stir up some of that desired, sophomoric controversy.
I’m not sure if any of the candidates, republican or democrat (or the majority of the human race for that matter), fully realize that environmental issues are not just a stubborn irritation we need to deal with, like terrorism or health care costs or the national debt, but requires an entire philosophical awakening to how we live on planet earth, which is constantly sending us grave messages about our lifestyle in the same way our bodies warn us through symptoms that we’re living inappropriately. The planet and everything on it runs on an operating system of balance. You eat a diet of donuts and your body will quickly become unbalanced and falter, you cut down all the trees while at the same time exponentially increasing the release of greenhouse gases and the altered, unbalanced climate will throw the entire planet out of whack.
The result is rising, warming, acidifying oceans, massive, destructive storms with expensive restorations, demonic forest fires, migrating and/or disappearing species, suffocating droughts and declining fresh water supplies, crop failures, heat waves, air quality issues and respiratory consequences, and all of it potentially cascading into a domino effect leading to a massive decline in the human population if not eventual extinction.
Reducing climate change to a fully delineated and isolated problem requiring limited corrective steps and codification is a dangerous mindset. It’s only one symptom of many, all caused by living out of balance with nature. Ameliorating practically every human problem (believe it or not) starts by reconnecting with nature and learning how to live within its laws. We’ve been rushing toward the threshold of imbalance, and once we pass it – if we haven’t already – we’ll suffer the same fate of every other species unconsciously expanding its population until a deadly natural correction returns it to balance. That is how the planet operates. Balance must be restored for life to continue, and the only way to avoid such a correction is to redirect and apply our evolved intelligence to live appropriately, in tune with nature in all that we do.
Polls often indicate that a majority of people think the country is headed on the wrong path. Do they know what path we should be on? Maybe a panel of experts could challenge presidential candidates (and everyone else) on their economical, geopolitical, philosophical, and biologically-based opinions on the proper path to take for human survival.