Brute Force with Best Intentions

Coupling Brute Force with the Best of Intentions in an open market economy sometimes seems like the ideal way of pushing through tough legislation or just simply getting the right thing done. This is after all, a technique which may prove unpopular at first, but necessary in the long run.

2 incidents come to mind in light of recent times. Firstly, the falsified reports emanating from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which suggested that the Himalayan Glaciers would melt by 2035. Part of the problem here stems from the fact that the drafts of these documents were NOT made public or open to public scrutiny. Its not really difficult to see the actual reason behind this - the urgency factor associated with anything connected to Global warming in this day and age. 

One needs to understand that the predictions that are done by climatologists are usually based upon models onto which past data is fed. In this case, the math behind the science is after all an extrapolation of what the situation might be with a given set of parameters.
This is why the scientific fraternity is so deeply divided on the issue. Today, any evidence that is put forward to substantiate the claims that the environmental degradation we see all aroud us is a direct result of human activity is torn to shreds by skeptics and science lobbies funded by smoke-belching Businesses on the grounds that the models used are way off target.  

Nevertheless Rajendra Pachauri of the IPCC in the Best Interests of the planet pushed these results out to the public and began to press Governments across the world for a deal on cutting fuel emissions. After the crisis broke, Rajendra indirectly hinted that his intent was actually to force governments across the world to come to an agreement on the phased reduction of fossil fuels (something that vested powers of the west seem to have successfully put off till now).

However this brute force method has given way to widespread condemnation of this UN body combined with loss of integrity for years of genuine research conducted by hundreds of its scientists. The outcome is rather regrettable, governments across the world will now be averse to listening to anything from the worlds most renowned body on climate change. This coupled with the slow global economic recovery would mean that the developed world would be loathe to agree on any cuts in emissions. The developing world with their beggar my neighbour policies inherited from the west would act only if the Developed world acts and hence the vicious cycle would continue.

What this means is that Biodiversity loss would continue, the earth's temperature would get warmer, ocean levels would gradually rise over time and our younger generations would be looking at pictures of elephants, dolphins and turtles in their elementary school books to know what animals once lived in our zoos.

The Second example is the Obamacare, read President Obama's Brand of Healthcare. Never before, has an American President been able to push through so tough a bill on Universal healthcare for the American people. Healthcare was an always has been a sticky point for Americans, thousands of whom are denied healthcare every year for a variety of reasons. However, the manner in which this bill was muscled through in Congress seems to have rubbed everyone the wrong way.

There was hardly any debate on the merits/demerits of the Healthcare Bill. Just high pitched soundbytes from both sides. One side condemning the bill as a form of embracing socialism, while the other side heralding it as the need of the hour. What was supposed to result in savings for the American Government down the line, is now being passed down the the consumer as higher Insurance Premiums. 

The Democratic party looks likely to face an uphill battle in the November mid-term elections over this thorny issue of Obamacare. Why? Again, as in the above case, a form of healthcare, completely understood by only a few, was forced down the American Public on the guise of Best Intentions in the long run at a time when the US is already running record levels of Debt. 

The loser in both these cases is undoubtedly humanity. Global warming is a real and present danger, one that has been leaving its calling card for the past 30 years at regular intervals. The inability of world governments to agree to a plan that cuts emissions will cost humanity in the long run and we may not even be there to witness it.

In the same manner, the inability of the public to realise the fact that painful legislation passed today could make a better tomorrow, would eventually deprive them of a better livelihood in tomorrows world. 

Sometimes Brute Force is used to push through Necessary evils, but in a world where information is at everyones fingertips and consumer comfort is the luxury of our times, mankind would go through great lengths to preseve this luxury at all costs. The Human trait of procrastinating will eventually leave the impossible decisions for the coming generations. Brute force with Best Intentions was the last weapon in the kitty, that worked.

To put it in a nutshell, we are all seated comfortably in an airconditioned SUV with a full tank headed into the Mojave desert with limited food supplies for 2 days and not a petrol pump in sight. The plan is to camp out in the desert for a week and then to return. The problem is, we may just not return!!