I’ve been wanting to do some water quality tests, and it has been quite a shock to me to realize the enormous level of resistance to this. I’m confronted with “We don’t want people like you in our community…We are oil drillers, anything that gets in the way of farming and drilling is not going to happen.” It’s quite depressing and disappointing. It’s not about getting in the way – it’s about solving a potentially solvable problem before it gets worse. From what Trump has said previously, I could be talking to him when I talk to these people.
So given what is likely to happen to the EPA, and the fact that most of us are excluded from circles that hold don’t hold an environmental point of view, and therefore our ability to influence through dialogue is limited, I’ve been thinking of maybe privatizing the EPA. Form a nonprofit that helps companies become eco-friendly, then certifies companies and properties as being eco-friendly. So, for example, this is a product from Tasty Bite that I enjoy:
No stamp – people divest and isolate them from the business and social community.
It may be the best that can be done for the next few years.
All of this happens at the same time as the Israel dialogue. I have to say, thinking about puppet governments, Kerry’s speech was offensive in that its overall tone was that Israel is a puppet of the U.S. (which many Arab countries believe anyway). The suggestion that an Israeli one-state could either be Jewish or democratic but not both is also offensive.
Two states is an extreme solution to tension within one state. It would be like a foreign country saying that the U.S. should split into 2 territories – one ruled by Trump, the other by Clinton (or an Obama 3rd term). Under what conditions would a separate state be a desirable solution?
- If a sizeable population has no voice in its living conditions (no ability to work, go to school, worship freely, and live freely from most harassment).
- If people are unable to live together without loss of life.
Most conflicts can be diffused with time alone. The window of escalation is time-dependent. So, how hard is it to make people want to have you a part of their community? Settlements should be about people finding stable housing, not surveillance posts. If you settle somewhere offering jobs, schools, and friendship with a concern for the values of the community, you should be welcome. If you are a refugee with no home, then the community is, I believe, ethically obligated to help. The standard for integration is less.
So, to keep things interesting, let’s leave both options on the table – one state, two states, but let’s all try a little harder to make the other side like us, and love the differences when they occur in the context of tolerable tension that allows for interesting solutions to be produced.