Terrorism and climate change are being debated in Canada and America in a political environment far from ideal. With partisanship increasing and the rise of social media each side seems trapped by its own hardened positions. I can’t recall the last time I heard a constructive conversation between conservatives and liberals on these subjects. It can feel that progress has stalled. Thus rather than trying to find common ground and doing the hard work of building consensus both sides rely on legislative power to force change. But anything accomplished by force can be undone in the next election—hardly the formula for lasting change.
Terrorism and climate change are two of the great challenges facing my generation and the two issues have one thing in common. Each issue is taken seriously by one side and not taken seriously by the other side.
Terrorism and climate change match traditional areas of interest for conservatives and liberals—namely security and the environment. Here in Alberta the NDP have implemented a carbon tax in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Though Alberta’s economy is struggling our NDP government has decided not to delay action. The Wildrose Party has launched successful critiques of this policy and whipped up opposition to it. The exemptions for some industries and not others leave Albertans confused why some must bear the full brunt of the new tax while others do not. Neighbouring Premier Brad Wall has emerged as perhaps the most effective opponent to a carbon tax arguing, persuasively, that now is a terrible economic time to implement this tax. And that without reciprocal international actions all the carbon tax will do is make our domestic industries less competitive.
South of the border President Trump signed an executive order temporarily stopping all refugees from entering the USA. It also stopped entry to nationals from 7 countries with a history of terrorism for 90 days and banned refugees from Syria indefinitely. Liberals immediately eviscerated this executive order for its botched rollout, for excluding the countries where the 9/11 terrorists actually came from, for closing the door on the Earth’s most vulnerable and the implicit discrimination in limiting admission to minority religions in Muslim majority countries.
Because security and the environment are traditional areas of interest for the left and right it’s not surprising that each respective party has chosen to prioritize them. I’m not arguing for moral equivalency between the NDP’s carbon tax and Trump’s immigration order, but what’s clear is that both policies are clumsy first attempts to deal with a complicated problem. Thus criticizing each has been easy. Liberals can offer scathing critiques of President Trump’s immigration order—that you can’t win this war against radical ideology with blanket bans that alienate our Muslim allies. Okay, I agree, but then what’s your plan to combat terrorism? Conservatives continue to pick apart the carbon tax as poorly timed, confusing, ineffective and inconsistent. Okay, I agree so what’s your plan to reduce greenhouse gases? Criticism and scepticism are necessary, but we need more.
This problem is perfectly highlighted by the predictable responses by our political leaders. In response to President Trump’s immigration order Prime Minister Trudeau tweeted out “Diversity is our strength.” Another useless platitude that doesn’t tell me anything about his plan to combat this threat. Last week a conservative leader tweeted out a picture of himself reading “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels.” A book rife with dubious claims. Neither seems to be able to say, ‘Okay, yes this is a serious problem. I don’t agree with this strategy, but here’s my alternative plan’. Instead each side retreats to positions that basically look delusional.
Look, it’s perfectly legitimate to believe that climate change is a myth, or that it’s not caused by human activity or that its dangers are overblown. But you’re going to have to make your case. If you don’t believe that radical Islam is a serious threat then say so. Tell us why the multiple terrorist attacks in Europe and the recruitment of thousands of its citizens who have joined the fight in Syria shouldn’t be cause for concern. This is also a perfectly legitimate position, but you’re going to have to make your case.
I believe that we can find a solution between the false choice of xenophobia and the naiveté of open borders, as Jason Kenney aptly put it. I also believe we can find a solution between the climate change hyper-alarmism of the left and the radical climate change scepticism on the right. But first we need to recognize the validity of each other’s fears. And each challenge won’t be met without the earnest engagement of both conservatives and liberals.
Our leaders here and in America are good people, but as constituents it is our duty to tell them when they need to do better. Simply put, on these issues they need to raise their game. We need to begin telling ourselves and each other uncomfortable truths and prepare for the hard work we have ahead.
Medicine Hat News. February 4, 2017.