November 17, 2015 - 10:55
Upon reading Elizabeth Kolbert's profile of Van Jones and his philosophies and plans in regards to the archaic climate crisis, we wonder if perhaps his plans could have been effective in slowing the collapse of Western Civilization .Jones is right- the problems created by climate change is a long walk. But his approach to how the government could have aided the climate crisis take ACTION, directly and in small measures, so the general feeling is not one of dispair and cynicism is less likely to infect the society of the time. His plan is effective as precautionary for maintaining the environment and the trust and engagement of the people and the government with eachother. On page 46 we speak of the etymology of economics- household management, due to the greek oikos (house) and nomos (rules and laws). Why, then, were the citizens of our house, the world that we live in, so disenfranchised? Jones is speaking to and for the people. At multiple points in Kolbert's article he encourages people to lobby for their attention to be givent to their interests and needs. If the people are able to take an active role in supporting governmental action, there's an amount of investment that occurs. We spoke of government intervention being required for intervention in the climate crisis, but Jones' approach is more beneficial to all parties; instead of raising the market prices of harmful products like oil and carbon, or forbidding any of the harfmul products, he proposed creating change through positive, instead of prohibitive, means. Jones' advocation for lobbying is a start to empowering the people to reclaim their place in government and policy making. It seems to us that Jones took on a unique but powerful twist on government intervention in the climate change war by encouraging citizens to take up conversation with the government and the government to truly think about what actions would benefit the people in the long run.