Keystone XL Rally
Christina Kirk writes:
The morning of February 17th I awoke with a sense of excitement and purpose. This was no ordinary Sunday. It was a day of both personal and historic significance; my first ever rally, and the largest of its kind in the United States. The excitement built as we stopped at Metro Center. Here individuals and groups, distinguished by their cleverly sloganed signs like “No Keystone XL” “There is no Planet B” and my personal favorite “I give a Frack”. It was a kind of informal gathering as we all made the final transfer on the Blue Line that would take us to the Mall – the site of some of America’s most famous historic gatherings, the place where Martin Luther King Jr. and a quarter of a million people stood together for racial equality, now the place where an estimated 40,000 would also try to do the same for climate change.
The official title was the “Forward on Climate Rally” and such a broad swath allowed for a wide variety of environmental interests, from climate change to sustainable farming, to be represented. Still one topic clearly dominated them all – the Keystone Pipeline Extension. The reason was obvious. The proposed pipeline would run through no less than six states, span vertically across the entire United States, and add an additional 1,897km of pipeline to the already 3,460km mammoth. Despite the fears of the potentially detrimental environmental costs this pipeline would bring, the fate of the entire project rests in the hands of one man – President Barack Obama. As much as the rally was a gathering of activists showing their support of environmental conservation it was, more than anything, a message to President Obama.
When one speaker excitedly addressed the crowd he exclaimed “All eyes are on us today!” I wanted so dearly to believe him so I hastily checked my phone for news of the event, hoping to see breaking headlines of thousands of activists marching on Washington, wanting dearly to be part of some historic legend. I was disappointed.
I couldn’t help but feel that the odds were against us. Not only were we fighting a battle of influence against multi-billion dollar oil industries, we were fighting against America’s economic growth in a time of recovery, fighting against the jobs likely to be created in the process of the extension, and fighting for media space during a time when North Korea had recently tested nuclear weapons. Essentially we were fighting a losing battle.
The night of February 19th I realized that Obama will likely sign in favor of the Keystone Extension. Some might call this pessimistic but I call it realistic. The thought of migratory birds losing their habitats is not what keeps Obama up at night. Political influence in this country comes from either money or masses. Currently the environmental movement does not have enough of either. Because of the economic ramifications of environmental change, environmentalists should instead focus more on gathering support and followers willing to publicly demonstrate for change.
There are a couple points I would like to address here, Christina. I am somewhat confused by your inconsistent feelings toward the rally and the KXL pipeline.
First you state that you are full with “excitement and purpose,” clear feelings of an optimist. It is my understanding that something changed your mind to become a pessimist after the rally, but what changed your mind is not exactly clear. You wanted “so dearly to believe” the speaker that eyes were on us, but you didn’t bother to look. 27 news stations, including CBS, CNN, MSNBC, PBS, and NBC, aired reports of the rally, displaying headlines, “Thousands March on DC Protest,” and “Thousands at US Rally Against Climate Change.” 6 radio stations provided stories and 119 articles were printed from hundreds of news sources, including the New York Times, Huffington Post, and Business Week, focusing on the rally and its implications for the climate. I am willing to produce/recount any of these articles if necessary.
Secondly, I would like to clarify some of the messages surrounding the rally and KXL. In your blog you seem to frame the KXL as a conservation issue with words such as “migratory birds losing their habitats.” While the pipeline does in fact pose a threat to migratory bird species and various ecosystems, it is also an issue of public health and global security. The KXL pipeline will be carrying tar sands oil, a type of oil that is significantly more dangerous and corrosive than conventional oil, making it more likely to spill. What is alarming is that these spills, seen before in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, have resulted in numerous health cases including higher rates of cancer, skin and brain lesions, and neurological disorders. As far as global security goes, there a number of risks taken with the exporting of this oil. Tar sands companies are publicizing the false hope that exporting tar sands will help to reduce oil prices in the United States. This is not the case. Oil is a global commodity and depends heavily on foreign influences, not domestic exportation or refining of oil. KXL is not simply a conservation issue.
Lastly, I would like to question your last statement, “because of the economic ramifications of environmental change, environmentalists should instead focus more on gathering support and followers willing to publicly demonstrate for change.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase “economic ramifications” used here seems to have a negative connotation. A major problem in today’s policy world is that people believe that the economy and the environment are forever at odds with each other, this is not the case. A clean energy future can be as profitable as it is renewable.
Finally, the statement, “environmentalists should instead focus more on gathering support and followers willing to publicly demonstrate for change,” doesn’t make sense to me. Are you suggesting that the movement is not yet prevalent enough in modern society to inspire or institute change? At what point does a movement stop gathering followers and start rallying for change? Was the Forward on Climate Rally you attended not a public demonstration for change?
You call yourself a pessimist because you believe that jobs will always be chosen over the environment and human health, but again, that is not the case. Mike Brune, executive director at the Sierra Club actually spoke at the rally on how during the Bush administration, nearly 200 coal power plants were to be built around the country. Through rallies and gatherings of much less than 40,000 people, 300 coal plants were shut down since then, demonstrating the power of not only the climate movement, but political demonstration.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/us/politics/obama-donors-keystone-pipeline.html?hp&_r=0