I am inclined to believe the legions of scientists who testify to the need for Al Gore’s mounting campaign to address the human causes of global warming. I am inclined to believe that Gore hasn’t been championing this cause for two decades for anything but sincere reasons. I am inclined to believe that Gore has chosen 2006 as the moment to bring the environment to the forefront of the national debate because he honestly believes that the danger of doing nothing is severe.
I had the opportunity to see Gore’s storied non-Power Point presentation last year at the New York Society for Ethical Culture. I was blown away by how intense he was, how accessible he was, and how confident he was. Here was a man on a mission who was deriving his strength from the power of scientific data, moral imperative, and freedom of the “nothing left to lose” variety. Since then I have been convinced that we face a global crisis but I have done very little to address it.
It’s a vast problem, stretching from our energy use to our city planning to our fishing practices to our trade agreements. It’s so big that the small sacrifices available to me seem pathetically irrelevant. And so I’ve sat on the island of Manhattan with the full expectation that someday, perhaps even in my own lifetime, my fifth floor apartment might just be high enough to keep my feet dry.
A problem of this magnitude needs to be fought at my level through personal sacrifice, but it also requires fundamental policy changes that can only be driven from within and from on high. Someone needs to take the lead by setting a national and global set of priorities based on shared sacrifices and long term planning.
In short, we are living in the Second Antediluvian Period. When God told Noah to build an Ark it was so he could wipe the earth of human sin. As shepherds of the earth, we are failing in our duties by continuing activities that actively destroy earth’s balance. If a second Flood comes it will not be God punishing us for the sins we commit against each other but the earth reacting to our profound sins against its fragility.
Unlike in Noah’s time, we have much more advanced warning of this flood, which is a good thing because there is no Ark big enough to hold all of humanity. The Noah we need now is a man who won’t ask God what to do when the flood comes but rather what he can do to prevent it from happening. Remember, the Flood came to cleanse the earth, but maybe in the 21st Century we can take up our own mop so God doesn’t have to.
Al Gore could be our incarnation of Noah. He represents our best chance at redemption as he tries to guide us towards policies that would preempt the need for an Ark. He is ushering us all in hopes that the two-by-two of the Bible can be replaced by a one-and-all of today’s reality.
For this… is a critical moment. Ultimately, it is not about any scientific discussion or political dialogue; it is about who we are as human beings. It is about our capacity to transcend our limitations, to rise to this new occasion. To see with our hearts, as well as our heads, the response that is now called for. This is a moral, ethical, and spiritual challenge.
Just as we can no longer ignore this challenge, neither should we fear it. Instead, we should welcome it. Both the danger and the opportunity. And then we will meet it because we must.
We have accepted and met other great challenges in the past. We declared our liberty and then won it. We designed a new form of government. We freed the slaves. We gave women the right to vote. We took on Jim Crow and segregation. We cured polio and helped eradicate smallpox, we landed on the moon, we brought down Communism, and we helped end apartheid.
We even solved a global environmental crisis – the hole in the stratospheric ozone layer – because Republicans and Democrats, rich nations and poor nations, businessmen and scientists, all came together to shape a solution.
And now we face a crisis with unprecedented danger that also presents an opportunity like no other. As we rise to meet this historic challenge, it promises us prosperity, common purpose, and the renewal of our moral authority.
We should not wait. We cannot wait. We must not wait.
The only thing missing is political will. But in our democracy, political will is a renewable resource.
Gore envisions an awakening of our democracy to confront the global challenges that we face. He foresees policies that address not only how much energy we extract from the earth but also how much life we extract from the developing world. Gore quotes General Omar Bradley, who said at the end of World War II, “It is time we steered by the stars and not by the lights of each passing ship.” That means addressing terror by addressing poverty, taking on job loss by taking on education, by reversing global warming by rejecting the primacy of old technology. Coming out on top means fighting the war not just the battles.
If this country hopes to survive the threats of this globalized world and of its own fledgling democracy, we must seize the opportunities and priveleges afforded to us by these very things. Al Gore gets it and I cannot understate how much I am already inclined to vote for him in 2008. I hope he runs.














April 17th, 2006 at 11:41 pm
The good news for people who like Gore news is that Ben Smith has a scoop on Gore laying the groundwork to run for president.
Chris Bowers says he has to wait for Gore to form a PAC and hire a few more staffers before he’ll put Gore in the MyDD straw poll. My guess is once that happens, Gore immediately enters the top three netroots candidates - joining Feingold and bumping either Warner or Clark down the list.
Additionally, my current thinking is that the only way we can stop global warming is by passing legislation that bans political donations by individuals, unions, corporations, PACs, and 527s. Sounds odd? My point is that individuals can never do anything to stop global warming from a conservation standpoint. There are simply too many people who won’t act responsibly or too many corporations that can do too much damage on their own. We also can’t rely on the free market to have corporations limiting their own emissions etc - the bottom line will always be too much of a draw. Likewise, we can never expect the US government - who has to be the leader on any change actually having major effect - from passing laws that would induce serious limits on pollution while the auto and energy industries have their money in politics.
Once we get the corrupting influence of lobbyists’ dollars and corporate donations away from our politician, we’ll be able to push for sea change in climate control and environmental protections. The same goes for health care reform, military spending reform, and pension/social safety net reform. Let’s clean out the filthy lucre from politics and then we can watch good government reap its rewards.
April 18th, 2006 at 2:25 am
Not a huge fan of Al Gore, but he’s got it right on this issue….
Global warming is a VERY serious threat to our children and grandchildren, and I tip my hat to Mr. Gore for refusing to let the neocons bash him completely out of the scene on this issue….
Blog ON, bro…
April 18th, 2006 at 11:22 am
I had a little exchange with a GOP commenter over at BIO. I want to log it here for my own sake (yes, to listen to myself talk):
GreenGOP Says :
I don’t doubt Gore’s environmentalist credentials. My question is what was he doing for 8 years as VP on this issue? He and Clinton merely maintained the status quo with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC states: overlooking human rights abuses and terrorist financing in exchange for a steady, cheap oil supply. Had Gore put his ‘passion’ to work starting in 1992, we’d be much farther along on renewables than we are today. As a Republican, I would love to see Gore run in 2008, especially after he ‘apologized’ for America at a recent speech he gave in Saudi Arabia. WE should apologize to THEM? The Saudis produced 9/11 and Clinton/Gore gave Al Queda time and confidence to plan and execute the attack. Let’s remember, the US was hit by terror attacks 5 times in their administration, and they offered no response whatsoever. Gore ‘08? I love it.
the stuffed tiger Says :
GreenGOP:
I really encourage you to read the article I link to in my post. In it Gore defines the issue of Global Warming as the next great mission of our nation and describes a renaissance of American civic commitment. Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat I believe that our next President must be in the vein of an FDR or Lincoln (a Democrat and a Republican, btw, although both should be considered highly liberal). Our challenges are too great to accept someone lacking in vision.
If you want to focus on terrorism instead of climate change, fine, I’ll come along. But addressing terror means more than going after rogue regimes (especially with trumped up evidence). I think that Gore has a deeper understanding of the roots of terrorism than any of his Primary or General Election opponents do. As such, I believe he can craft a more comprehensive response to terror that includes a read assault on global poverty.
Finally, if you’re thrilled at the prospect of Gore running in 2008 because you think it will mean a GOP victory then I ask you which of your candidate can compete with Gore on vision? Which Republican is offering anything but the politics of tinkering?
Read the article and check out the man’s vision. As a GOP voter I think it will scare you politically but inspire you personally.
April 19th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
TST - I really appreciated this post. You are very right that it is a vast issue, and contributions stem from pretty much every aspect of our society. I too have heard Gore speak, at my graduation from Hopkins. Ironically I received the call from my now employer I beleive while he was on stage. However, I don’t think Gore should run - I think he’s got an issue, and needs to stick with it, and really continue to do what he’s doing if he wants to achieve anything. But I don’t see him as Noah, and I don’t see this as a God issue. But I do agree that whatever position we’ve got ourselves into, we can get ourselves through - not necessarily out of, but through.
I read Laurie David’s post on Huff (no link, sorry) and was disturbed that she thought the message of Ice Age 2 one which would help her campaign. If nothing else, it would teach adaptation. I am consistently amazed that adaption is not something anyone will consider in our society. It seems as though in every situation, even beyond climate change, it is man’s fault, and man must change his ways or die. We are humans, we have lived on this planet for only a short period of time, but we have probably lived through more catastrophe than any other animal, simply because we are THE adaptive species. That’s why we’re #1.
April 19th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Yeah I can’t wait until I adapt a shiny otter-like fur coat that makes for easy swimming. I’d be slick!
April 19th, 2006 at 5:25 pm
I have to ask, what exactly do you mean by adapt? From what I understand, adaptation means changing (often physically) to best take advantage of/fend off environmental changes. But when the ocean’s rising temperatures kill the plankton that feed everything in the ocean and melt the glaciers that feed so many of our rivers (all the major ones in China, for example) I’m struck by how little we’ll have available to us to use in our adaptation. Thoughts?
April 21st, 2006 at 5:55 am
[…] Turning to the future, I look forward to the 2008 elections on both sides of the political spectrum. For the first time since 1928, neither the sitting President nor his VP are in the running for the next election, so this one is as wide open as it gets. Coupled with the anti-bullshit power of the blogs (Yay, us), a multi-candidate primary will be a battle not for the center–Hillary and her hairdo have that space occupied on both sides of the aisle these days–but for the soul of the party. Which Republican and which Democrat will successfully defend their positions from within and from without their party? I recently wrote that I believe Gore is the man who can do it for the Democrats (please let’s not have that sentence be the subject of all comments!) because I believe he is A) a true Democrat and B) a visionary who can unite the country. You’ll notice that I don’t buy that primaries weaken candidates in the General, I believe that we should have high enough standards to find people who can take their licks and come out stronger. […]
April 21st, 2006 at 1:20 pm
[…] Turning to the future, I look forward to the 2008 elections on both sides of the political spectrum. For the first time since 1928, neither the sitting President nor his VP are in the running for the next election, so this one is as wide open as it gets. Coupled with the anti-bullshit power of the blogs (Yay, us), a multi-candidate primary will be a battle not for the center–Hillary and her hairdo have that space occupied on both sides of the aisle these days–but for the soul of the party. Which Republican and which Democrat will successfully defend their positions from within and from without their party? I recently wrote that I believe Gore is the man who can do it for the Democrats (please let’s not have that sentence be the subject of all comments!) because I believe he is A) a true Democrat and B) a visionary who can unite the country. You’ll notice that I don’t buy that primaries weaken candidates in the General, I believe that we should have high enough standards to find people who can take their licks and come out stronger. […]