For those interested in my few mins recapitulative interpretation of yesterday’s Somerville open meeting with our congressman, here it is.
Joe Curtatone (our mayor) was here but he did not talk. That was not his meeting. So far I've liked or respected what I've heard Joe say in the past. Now as for Mike my Congressman (Mike Capuano). I heard him briefly once before and I like his personality. He seems a very nice and personable man, no doubt. Yet...
It was an open meeting, so: We asked questions, Mike answered. There were the rules. But for me it has been overall disappointing. It's not even the fact that Mike's answers were 'dark', as a matter of facts the reality is pretty darn grim. I can take that. It’s not a surprise and I did not expect him (or the party) to be our savior, or give keys in hands to reopen the doors of reasons either. He said he answered honestly, and I believe that he indeed gave ‘his’ honest answers (and I used 'his' on purpose). Now what did not work for me is what he conveyed to the public and how he said it.
 |
| Unknown author (to me) - but it's a cool gap, and hopefully one that we'll be able to bridge... |
I have to pause for second, digest what I heard yesterday. But here are few of my glimpses of this open meeting (in no specific order). This means that these are my recollection and thoughts (more than a constructed analysis) and only engage me. Although pay attention to the facts within the thoughts.
First there was kind of an indirect validation of what we’re seeing right now. The Justice system in our country does not hold on its own when it comes to the government. It is made by the clique in power. That clique is basically above investigation at this point, when by the way I think it should be investigated and monitored at all times –for this administration and all others– for the good of the people (whose life is basically in their hand). What was not encouraging is conveying to us that good or bad it is what it is. It was not even defeatism, Mike seems a fighter of some sort. I believe he just accepts or even believes in this system. No questions (really) asked.
Another one: What can we do to protect the EPA now? Not much but it’s ok…. Not much will happen anyway: they won’t remove protections (regulations), they will just not enforce them… Huh? 2 things: (1) again this is against the law, an EPA regulation should be enforceable by law and (2) this is not true anyway, or he is not paying attention to the bills on the floor right now (follow the bill monitoring I do on my blog to see the congress ‘reality’). Oh don’t worry Claire these bills won’t pass. Not true again, the Republicans hold an uncontested majority and vote in block. So far nothing has prevented a nomination, right? And the same is going for dangerous bills that are now passing slowly through the system being voted in (the House first, the Senate next, then the Prez signs…)
Another one again. Protecting Independent Science? Mike ‘believes’ in Science so that’s not the issue for him and we (scientists) are on our own. What is more important is to work on the solutions. Well... a lot of the solutions (for instance to alleviate climate change issues) are going to come from the scientific community, so if you can't 'do science' it's going to be tough to come up with viable solutions. By the way Science is not something you ‘believe’ in. Science is not a religion but an inquiry methodology that produces repeatable outcomes. And as such it is a methodology that is critical in policy making. This is why science is something to protect as much as freedom of expression is (and should make it in the Constitution if it's not). I have lived here long enough to have witnessed that the basic education of our people is fairly poor when it comes to the knowledge about what science is and its value to the society. Mike's remark was just an an example of how science is not-understood. Now there is one thing Mike mentioned that I agree with and which has also been raised many times by others: Scientists have to be more politically involved. Us humans are political beings, and it is one of our duties to make sure that we are fully part of the political scenery. Why? Because this is THE way to make sure that each of us operates as a balance to the system and ensures the well-being of our people collectively. The scientists have an incredible body of knowledge that they can communicate in a way that is understandable to most, and inform on problems and solutions. They understand very well checks and balance as their work follow such a system (peer-reviews) – which reduces errors and abuses. So hell yes, what they have has to come into play in politics. Oh another thing: Mike made me think that he separates science and social issues. But let’s not forget that some of the science fields are all about social issues. What do we think for instance the field of medicine, ecology, primatology, veterinary research, environmental sciences, conservation, biodiversity studies and many of the natural sciences are about? And I am not leaving math, physics, chemistry or other fields out: how do we think we would operate in this world without the machinery that is hidden in every corner of our world? It’s social work all right: these science leads to the very society we live in. As I say: the concept of science is blatantly communicated in our education for our own no-good at all…
Another one: 2018, 2018, 2018… It’s all about the 2018 elections. Push for having democrats in at the next elections – and by the way give money to the democrats in swing states. That’s the only good course of actions. That was more or less the message I heard. Nothing will change in effect really until then. I understand, it's important however… The message is bad. Why? because it conveys that the people’s voice has basically no weight at this very moment. It is simply being ignored. We’re treated like kids having a tantrum. We can scream all we want, the only voices that have a weight are the voices of the various elected representatives. Now are these representatives really our representatives? Think twice: They react to the money (and special interest groups with money) more than the voices of the average Joes and Janes (you and I). Yep. So the voice of the people does not really count much at the end. Am I really going to wait 2018 to see the same mediocre system outcome again and while rights are being slashed left and right every day? Is it the country that the Founding Fathers wanted? I don’t think so. I think it’s time for the people to have their voice count for real. Protest louder, resist with strength and determination, be organized and efficient, unify, pair with the media that we want independent, factual and fair… We need to be a real check and balance, because there’s none really at the moment…
It's going to get worse before it gets better (I agree). Yes true. But watch out: Better compared to what? Better to the reference that we will have at the time when the lead hand changes. A lot of damages will be done in next few weeks, months and years. That reference level will be low (too low) and unfortunately will be a new normal in our mind, because we are prone to forget. There is actually a term for this in the conservation field: the Shifting Baseline Syndrome. Won't happen? Click on the link. Another thing to remember is that what we lose took centuries to gain or build and will take decades or even centuries (depending on what you destroy) to rebuild or regain. Me? What I want is something better than what we had, which was acceptable yet far from perfect, but a base to work from.
It’s not politics as usual (I agree). But I am adding that we should never normalize what is going on right now. Some very close to me remind me that they are in power thanks to our democratic system. Yes as were most of our last century dictators in Europe. So may I ask the point is? This just reminds me that we better remember that we will have to reform this faulty system at some point after we address the immediate issues. We will have to re-‘direct’ the democratic process. What I mean with 're-direct' is that right now America is a democratic republic, where the people ‘govern’ indirectly through a body of elected officials. But the levels of indirections are so thick and the gap between the people and the government is so gigantic that that we might as well speak 2 different languages. We have to cut the crap in between. The government should be working for us the people. And now they don’t. They work for themselves, their heirs and the lobbies that elected them and who fuel their bank accounts. The government and the lobbies are in bed together (and have been for decades). That has to get under the people’s control.
More later. Mike said more, so of course I have also more to comment on...
Europe poised for total ban on bee-harming pesticides: The world’s most widely used insecticides would be banned from all fields across Europe under draft regulations from the European commission [The Guardian]
