Change: Resist or Support?

To the editor: Does intentional change inevitably challenge freedom? Suppose change happens around us, promising harm without defense from fresh new approaches to curb newly developing conditions. Though "rights" do exist to stoutly deny its very existence, even to our own destruction, why do it? For example, we need freedom from blunders into disaster resulting from blindly unvarying behavior, while world climate changes. That can, over a single year, flood seaports into disability, dissipating global manufacturing by crippling intercontinental shipping of unassembled components and finished products - including Chevrolets. In turn, that would severely depress world economics even here. We need freedom from eminent domain's ability, sold as "preserving (memories of) rural scenery unchanged by industry", to drag out postponement of commercial wind's capacity to inventively rescue us from climate emergency's undertow into third world conditions. Using the technology would cause less harm than avoiding it. Is commercial wind itself industrial? Where's its soot; its grime? Here in the Northeast: its noise? Even large as conceivable, air passes through unchanged - unpolluted. Here, it uses the quietest turbine technology existing, inaudible above energizing wind outside legally binding setback perimeters! It doesn't repel all wildlife either, as deer, when you visit Tug Hill's wind farm, shows. Is freedom's value only in the right to inaction - or choice: sometimes stasis; sometimes change? Though fluctuating, long-term climate is changing - always trending warmer. Under climate emergency's rapid advance: maybe arriving this Antarctic summer or our next northern one we'd better change. Doesn't surroundings' obsolescence invoke enough warning, without requiring catastrophe's arrival to clarify inaction's danger? What would remain: shipping through small makeshift, upstream floating docks; delivering goods no more efficiently than by amphibious landing to/from beaches and launching ramps (hoping the sand can support the 18-wheel tractor-trailer conveyances, under their mounted containerized burdens); foreclosed mortgages; worthless property; money scrounged, by wheelbarrow load - for each loaf of bread; counting the dead? Though not shouted, there's gentle admonition paralleling "fire in a crowded theater;" smell the "smoke." We need orderly action. David E. Manwell

Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment