BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Maria Ashot

Listed below are comments made by Maria Ashot between Monday, 21st December 2009 (13 Hours Ago) and Monday, 21st December 2009 (9 Hours Ago) .

«Newer
Older»

COP15: (No) Hopenhagen? 11:09pm on 21 Dec 2009 OK, this is for Mr Forefathers, continuing to answer questions that were put to me earlier, that I had not gotten around to answering sooner:

With regard to the question about the existence of some kind of "agenda" to lie to the human race about what our collective mismanagement of resources was doing to the planet:

When I referred to efforts that began before 1980, I was referring to the efforts of people like the faculty I worked with at Harvard (as their student) as well as distinguished scientists & authors I met in the early 1980s, who had by then logged probably well over a decade, some of them, spreading the word about their findings in the field & lab regarding the damage being done.

If you recall that until around 1990-1991, we had what amounted to a divided geopolitical landscape, with Two Realities operating, each one quite blind to the true nature of the other, it was not until the declared end of the Cold War that information became more broadly available to people on the other side of the divide, and even to many people on the inside of their own particular system.

In the USSR, Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost (literally, "Vocalisation") was the first official decree allowing any kind of specialised data to be discussed in the public space, by non-specialists (that would be me) as well as by specialists. Until that time, even discussing data on environmental conditions was criminal, and dangerous. The scientists who took time to speak with me, for many hours and even weeks on end, and to smuggle letters & books outside the USSR through me (and others as well, perhaps) were literally risking their lives.

Now, I would ask those who question the truth about AGW: "How many scientists do you imagine would be prepared to Risk Their Lives --literally -- to risk spending 25 years in the Gulag in Magadan or Yakutia for passing classified information to an American about the conditions of the environment as it was impacted by heavy Soviet industry -- if they did not in fact believe that there was a compelling reason to be concerned about what was happening that endangered even human survival per se?"

Those people in what I refer to as "Palin's Posse" or the "Denial Detachment" who believe pro-Copenhagen, pro-IPCC or pro-UN FCCC parties are somehow involved in a "political agenda" or a "conspiracy" of some kind to Dispossess the Wealthy or harm their own national/individual sovereignty through "doctored data" are -- unless they are themselves involved in a conspiracy to serve the commercial interests of the worst offenders -- hamstrung by their lack of immediate personal familiarity with how industry operates in other corners of the world.

Oh, in the best case, you will look at Robert Harrabin's reports, or glance at some video or snapshots on CNN or CBS, and get the sense that, yes, smokestacks pollute.

But most of you won't even bother to do that.

You keep going around in circles with familiar phrases that give you comfort.

You won't stay up to watch Nightline show you how a cell phone is put together, or how gold is being extracted in Peru. You never even had the stomach to watch the footage of the tsunami aftermath, either. You did not watch Blood Diamond, and you imagine Leonardo Di Caprio is just a Hollywood pretty-boy.

You won't do the hard research, yet you have no shortage of disparaging remarks for those of us who have, and who do, and who won't stop.

Because we know that heptyl pollution -- from rockets -- causes birth defects. Because we have heard from the Ministry of Health in Ukraine, and from the most ostensibly "anti-Russian" elements in the city of Lvov (who actually speak perfect Russian and are trained scientists) that they have one of the worst rates of infant morbidity and gestational anomalies in the world, post- Chernobyl.

Because we go out there in the field and speak with Brazilians, Tajiks, Turkmens, Kazakhs, Chinese, Taiwanese, Japanese, Canadians, Spaniards -- and Californians -- and we exchange data.

And that is what some of us (I am just one little person out of many thousands, judging just from the MoveOn community in Northern California, and no, I do not agree with all of their politics, but I do agree with them on the need for rededication to eco-sanity in the USA, certainly) have been doing for well over thirty years.

Much of that you don't know about, because you don't rub shoulders with this community.

And very few people are willing to write about it as candidly & relentlessly as I have, here. Why do I dot this? Because I believe many of you, on the other side, are indeed well-intentioned, and can be brought around to see things rationally.

To understand that a whole lot of business on this planet is done in untidy & really, literally, Sense-Less ways. For no good reason whatsoever. And easily fixable. EASILY.

Tell an African woman you have a way to make sure she has no more than three pregnancies, and three healthy babies, for her entire lifetime and watch her weep with joy. Really, not a stretch. Imagine all those poor women living in constant fear of rape, which is happening all the time, anywhere, brutally, with impunity... Now imagine how much worse the experience for them when they also face the heightened risk of a pregnancy -- a High-Risk Pregnancy -- as a direct result of that highly likely rape.

Imagine all the slaves employed all over the planet in manufacturing soccer balls, tennis balls, sports shirts for your favourite brand. You know how little they are paid. You know how much the items cost.

Now suppose you had the means to make those items cost twice as much, so half as many would be sold -- without significantly reducing the revenue streams of the shareholders -- and so those slaves could actually be paid two or three times more per item, and laws could be passed & enforced to shut down anyone who did not comply with international child labour statutes.

How bad is that? How much does it infringe on sacrosanct national sovereignty & corporate governance?

Why does any little girl require more than 1, 2, 3 Barbie dolls? Why does any growing kid require more the 3 or 4 Gap for Kids shirts in the closet? You know they'll never wear them out!

No one needs to pass laws to accomplish these things. All that needs to happen is for the leadership of the private sector, working with the leadership of the public sector, to sit back down at the drawing board and re-invent how business is done, with an eye to HALVING emissions by 2020.

IT CAN BE DONE. IT IS EASIER THAN CURING CANCER.

And we are on track to do that, too.

All it takes is getting away from some old Calvinist ideas, such as the notion that every person on earth needs to be working six and a half days a week at their trade, for 10 hours or so a day.

Shift gears to a four-day work week, as Utah has done, and already you will reduce emissions.

Pass an international ban on using wood for non-essential goods (such as disposable chopsticks) and you will do something.

Double the price of new furniture and encourage people to recycle and refinish older furniture, instead of just dumping it into landfills or burning it for firewood, and bingo: you're doing something for planet earth.

Make people pay for the American telephone directory book, instead of just handing them out for free. There are so many ways we can make waste unappealing...

It is time to face the music: things could be done many better ways than we have allowed them to be done, for far too long. Instead of grousing about it, let's have some fun thinking of better ways to live.
COP15: (No) Hopenhagen? 9:53pm on 21 Dec 2009 Mr. Forefathers, Thank you for No. 389: I will try to tackle them, at least the ones I found from the list you provided.

OK, here goes, with apologies if they are not in the desired order:

1. Why do I travel so much on BA? BA is my favourite airline; they have excellent fares and superb service.

Not having flown for several decades, at all, and having spent eight years without using a personal automobile, at all, I feel I have earned the right to fly for a few years. I love trains and prefer non-polluting forms of transport. I walk a great deal, find it is good for my health (and everyone else in the family got healthier from living without a car). We use a car-share service sometimes, also something I endorse.

If I had my druthers, I would live in the EU full-time, take the train everywhere, and once a year travel by ship to the New(er) World. That would suit me fine.

However, at the present time, with the third kid in a US high school, I do have to spend a significant amount of time in the US, and so I do have to go back & forth. The work I do has value, at least for some people I know, but it does not pay much (nothing at all in fact, most of the time) and so I do the best I can to avoid being a burden. By the way, no one in my family of refugees/immigrants has ever taken a cent of any kind of public assistance, entitlement programme or anything of the sort. Our carbon footprint is tiny. I have not commuted to work in a personal vehicle since 1993. My current commute -- when I am not flying on BA & taking the Tube from Heathrow -- is less than 12 feet.

2. My husband's views:

My husband believes, as I do, that Russia took a huge wrong turn in 1917. More precisely, we both believe Europe took a huge wrong turn in 1914, and that much of the madness & pendulum swings of atrocities & recessions that followed for the next century or so (almost at that mark now) are a direct result of that wrong turn.

This fundamental shared ideological position is what allows the two of us to get along as well as we do.

The main difference between Mr Ashot & myself is that he is disinclined to view humankind in a positive light. I still do. I still believe -- even from looking at him, and his work, and following his personal efforts for the past quarter-century -- that human beings have the Light of God inside them (all of us, whether we stumble & fail or not), that we have the capacity to do extraordinary things, that we can find remarkable solutions to the most distressing problems, that we can accomplish anything we put our minds to -- if our purpose is true, and our motivation to rise above the limitations thrown up by ignorance, indolence or indifference.

Even though Ashot likes to act the misanthrope, he is actually just a regular, decent European male with all the typical wonderful qualities of the same -- probably not very different from you.

And even thought he likes to argue with me, and complain about me, and say things not very different from some of the things some of you have said, he still likes the results -- and, by implication, he still knows that I am a very dependable kind of friend, Brother-in-Arms (love that song by MK), whatever you want to call it.
Yeah, and Mother to the Offspring.

He does not, however, have the English to read anything I write, even if he does inspire quite a bit of it, because I am even more disinclined to accept a world that is hard on people like him or our children, than I normally would be, if it were just being hard on me.

We had an exciting and interesting interaction with the collapsing USSR, which began with a 32-page letter I wrote, in longhand, and of course in beautiful, poetic Russian, to M Gorbachev, back in the summer of 1986.
Some have suggested our story would make a fine thriller.

It is true that my experiences in the USSR left me generally unafraid. There were some sticky moments, yet, here I am, and nothing as bad as what was going on there then exists anywhere anymore. (Yes, I realise some of the Russian citizens quoted by the BBC occasionally say "It is scarier under Putin." In my opinion, that is a contemptible lie -- or they have amnesia, or they are under 30 years old. Russia still has a lot of work to do, and is doing it. But it is Heaven & Earth compared to where it was before, which was hellish.)

Mr Gorbachev became a friend. The late Mrs Gorbachev admired my husband's work even before that fateful step I took, however. She was an extraordinary woman and actually deserves a lot more credit than has been given to her in official texts for helping bring liberalisation to the former Soviet bloc of European nations, and to Russia itself.

The Gorbachevs really were intelligent people whose overriding goal was to make the country change for the better without descending into some kind of bloodbath. They were also influential in supporting the work of pro-environment scientists & activists (some of whom I met in person back in 1983, who really pushed me towards getting an education in this subject) against the planet-raping dinosaurs of the degenerate Communist system. You know the ideology of Communism is ultimately about enslaving a population and then mining its resources for the benefit of a corrupt few.

So that's two questions, Mr Forefathers. More soon.
COP15: (No) Hopenhagen? 9:12pm on 21 Dec 2009 No. 324, Kealey: Well, I would even consider something as straightforward as transferring ice-pack from the threatened ice-sheets onto tankers & parking it in refrigerated tanks in Australia.

Alternatively, building refrigeration systems onto Antarctic or Greenland terrain in order to slow down the loss of ice could be conceived of.

In a broader sense: if you know you have a problem, and the numbers are working against you, and you can't even bring yourselves to ensure the integrity of forestlands on Earth today, how can you even look at yourselves in the morning, when you stand in front of the mirror?

Why could the US decide it was important to fund a mission to the Moon, or now Russians want to fund a mission to Mars, but no one thinks its important to actually try doing something -- funded, designed, engineered, implemented -- to preserve human habitats?
Climate change and big figures 9:05pm on 21 Dec 2009 Alice, have you tried actually taking care of the plants?

And have you tried talking with them? No, I am not kidding.

Treat a plant with the same care, attention, affection & dignity you accord a human presence -- assuming you do, and from your writing here I would assume you do -- and it will thrive.

Russians used to be really good with nature...
COP15: (No) Hopenhagen? 7:51pm on 21 Dec 2009 Mr Forefathers: Thank you for the courtesy (No. 379).

Sorry, I have been busy with many of the latest developments.

Do feel free to repeat the questions -- with my apologies for putting you through the extra effort -- and let's see if I can't answer some of them.

You know, as I do, that this conversation often involves a lot of slogging through some oddities. So forgive me if I have appeared distracted at times. It is true that I am also attempting to keep a little storm-buffeted ship afloat.

But in my profession, questions are never to be avoided and always are met with respect for the interlocutor.
So ask away, and I shall check back in about 15-20 mins to read what the questions are, and offer you my responses.

Cheers, sir!
Climate change and big figures 7:44pm on 21 Dec 2009 The way to achieve population sanity is to make responsible procreation the second lesson after the literacy lesson, on the first day in school -- and from thereon in.

No, that need not require explaining the functioning of the human reproductive system to five-year-olds if that is not what you want taught.

All it involves is putting the idea in the heads of Boys as well as Girls: "How old are you? How old were you a year ago? How old are you going to be next year?"

And then you ask: "And when you are big and strong and all grown up, who will you be? And who will you be like?"

And then you say: "And will you be having a little boy or a little girl just like you, when you are all grown up?"

And then you say: "How many boys or girls just like you do you think you would like to be taking care of, when you are the age of your Father/Mother/Grandpa/Sister/Uncle?"

You would be surprised how effectively the brains of very young children process information.

If you convey, at a very early age, the idea that it is important to Think about family size, that there is some Desire (Choice) involved -- and if you gather the inputs from the very young Boys & Girls about how they perceive family size, family relations & family responsibilities -- you will find that you have a very receptive audience even in the youngest groups.

And then you just have to reinforce the right ideas -- early on, well ahead of puberty.

If more policymakers spent at least a year teaching primary school children, first-years -- the really, really small ones -- they would have more confidence in the extraordinary potential of education policy, when intelligently, positively crafted, to shape adult behaviours.

We do succeed, everywhere on earth, in teaching most little ones to read, write and count.

We can also teach them to think about their options when it comes to assuming responsibility for the care of others. Most little kids especially do not naturally crave large families, especially when they are poor.

The "value" of a having a very, very big family of offspring is largely an idea invented by powerful, wealthy and ambitions clans, in most cultures. It has been enshrined in some religious ideas as well, for the reason that many religious authorities have also been obsessed with power, and so have participated in the culture of dynasties that competed for political & economic power, and so saw the number of sons and daughters to use to forge alliances with others as an important advantage -- especially in the days of short or uncertain life expectancy.

Those ideas can be reconfigured in the awareness of most people. And it is not just the Girls who need to be taught differently: it must also be the Boys who learn that having a Wife & Children is COMPLICATED, not just a natural & obvious consequence of growing up.

Yes, it is good to become a Parent -- but you must be an Intelligent Parent. You cannot view a human life as anything akin to a weed, or even a blade of grass, to be allowed to grow haphazardly "just because."
Too much talk and pork in the US Senate? 7:29pm on 21 Dec 2009 Having waited for a couple of decades for Americans to reform themselves towards something resembling functionality, Mr Mardell, I have completely given up.

The American system of government represents the apogee of Mediocrity -- at best.

At worst, it becomes a reeking morass of ineptitude.

And repeating the mantra: "Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good" is merely a way of enshrining Mediocrity.

Notice how effectively the US delegation succeeded in irritating the Chinese delegation to the point where they got exactly the kind of reaction out of China that the US needed: a digging in that allowed America to look as if it had been forthcoming, when in fact it was not being forthcoming at all -- with the added bonus of making China look like the villain of Copenhagen.

Is that political genius, or is it a natural and ingrained talent for manipulation, or is it just plain bungling?

Personally, I believe it is deliberate and calculated, just as the Congressional procedural quagmires and the baconfest you describe. The chief proponents of this system benefit directly from its deficiencies and thus have a vested interest in perpetuating the foolishness.

But now that the rest of us realise we also have to breathe, and risk having our respiratory capacity impaired by these kinds of machinations, perhaps we will have to devise countermeasures to mitigate against the effects of American dysfunctionalism. That may actually also work in favour of mitigating climate change.

One example: EU leaders could set an example by refusing to accept calls or visits from US leaders until they start acting like they actually care about the consequences of their actions -- or inactions -- on the rest of us. You could stop according them any kind of deferential or preferential treatment. You could subject them to the exact same kind of foot-dragging they exhibit on issues that matter to everyone.

You could review your association with US firms that do not promote a green policy & support green legislation. We should, indeed, be focusing on getting some kind of proper climate bill passed.

There is all kinds of leverage at the disposal of the great world powers. Waiting for Americans to get better without an overriding incentive to do so is pointless. So apply the leverage, instead.
COP15: (No) Hopenhagen? 7:15pm on 21 Dec 2009 No. 359: Yes, and it applies to all of you who are pretending there is nothing wrong with the environment that our greed & mediocrity is the cause of.

Take a look in the mirror. Listen to yourselves.
Climate change and big figures 7:11pm on 21 Dec 2009 Alice: so the question I have is:

Some Russians, notably a portion of the better, non-alcoholic parents & the new generation of pro-earth farmers, are figuring out that they need to live in harmony with the land, their family, their community -- what in the West is promoted as "sustainable" farming.

I know these people: and quite a few of them get promoted even on the rather desultory & off-kilter Russian TV programing.

But far too many Russians somehow believe the word "zapreshcheno" -- "forbidden" -- does not apply to them on any personal level.

They want everyone else to follow logical & ethical concepts, yet they do not apply them to themselves.

I have had at least 20 people during my last two-month stay tell me about driving: "Obviously it is impossible to get anywhere if you follow the rules of the road. Everyone knows the rules of the road are not for anyone to follow strictly."

After which, there would be some really horrendous, dangerous driving.

What happened to the feeling of pride -- of satisfaction -- attached to doing things intelligently, BY THE RULES, and also effectively?

And the same applies to so many other areas of life.

Russians have become a people of expert excuse-makers. There was "your friend" Vladimir Yakunin on BBC video, on the record saying "Russia is misunderstood."

Our people were given a great, incalculable natural treasure to hold in trust: THAT LAND, which is worth so much more than the majority of incompetents who defile it with their greedy, criminal schemes.

Will we rise to the moment to defend its integrity as a whole, healthy, vital zapovednik -- preserve -- for the benefit of human survival? In which case, cleaning it up, protecting it, managing it, maintaining it must become the No. 1 Priority of every single Russian soul out there?

Or are we going to follow Esau's example and sell our birthright for a bowl of lentils? Or a Hummer?

I note with some satisfaction that EGaidar kicked the bucket. Maybe it marks the beginning of the end of the culture of Greed, in Russia. Because that is what his fat little cheeks represented, to me.

I met him once, in the 1990s, courtesy of Sun Microsystems. He had excellent English, no manners to speak of -- and really, really lame ideas. You could tell all he was after was pleasing whomever would give him the fattest bank account.

And now, at the ripe age of 53 -- just a 15-16 months older than I am -- his tenure as midwife of Russian 20th century oligarchy comes to an abrupt end.

And by the way: what of that "pyramid" over the Kremlin zone of Moscow? A hoax? A mirage? Any eyewitnesses? Lenin's relatives dropping in to visit the corpse?

First there was the "round lightning over Moscow" a couple of months ago, and now this bizarre thing.

As the saying goes: A Russian won't come to his senses ("cross himself") until he hears the thunderclap.

Anyone coming to their senses yet? Was the pyramid searching for signs of intelligent life?

And if so, did they find any?
Climate change and big figures 6:50pm on 21 Dec 2009 Just the AIG bailout alone is running into the hundreds of billions of US dollars. The NY Times yesterday or the day before cited a figure of 750Billion U$D, and rising.

So yes, it is absurd to speak of a 100 B fund as "a bug commitment."

It will require, in the end several Trillions of US currency (based on current values) -- but it will be well worth it, because, in the end, at least half of that money will be paid out in compensation to people working in the field, and will come right back in consumption & revenue.

The trick is to get the funds invested in green production now, so that when the compensation begins to flow it does not increase the emissions burden so much, but instead goes towards earth-friendly industries.

It can be done: it is not at all impossible. Those who imagine it is impossible should step aside and allow those of us who know how to get this done just get it done.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Maria Ashot