Change Depends on Who Steers the Wind

When the 30 x 30 concept hit the public, the initial impact in the rural areas such as Panhandle Nebraska was like the Old West had returned, and the money from the East came to tell the ranchers and farmers how to do things. The stories of water wars were returning, but with a tone of “future-speak” instead of quotes from a history book. Then was a time when the small operator could get squeezed out by someone with the ability to control natural resources. Cut off access to water and dry out the competing neighbor.

Funny how at that point we haven’t moved too far. Not as funny is now the story is still gaining momentum. The caretakers of morality and ethics are now concerned about our individual eating habits, the way we drive, what we say and write in public.

Somewhere we’ve forgotten that freedom comes at a price. We won’t always agree with what another person has the freedom to say or write. We, however, have the freedom to walk away from that thought and continue on with our lives.

Since the first discussions I’ve been part of, there have been people, official and coffee-shop level, denying the effort to curtail the amount of meat consumed. In exact words, no, I haven’t read that. I have, however, read of a panel, a team of officials from several agencies, whose responsibility includes curtailing the production of methane. Where is the largest amount of methane credited, except ranches and feedlots?

Yet another shirt-tale headline is the number of governors who support eliminating the production of internal combustion engines by 2035.

Let’s go a step further. There is also discussion of a “Convention of States.” A Convention of States is basically a call to make changes to the U.S. Constitution. It implies the potential for radical changes. If enough states get in line, the public can expect radical changes; how radical will depend on what side of the spectrum a person is standing on.

That is where the discussion gets interesting. Should we expect a perfect system, or just the best option available, and who determines if it is perfect? Perfect is defined by the baseline. To borrow the Bob Dylan line, the answer, my friend is blowing in the wind.

I’m not sure I always agree with Dylan at that point. The answer is in the wind, depending on the question. If you want the right answer, ask the right question, or ask the right person.

The collision of causes should concern us all. In the cause of taking care of the environment, and each other, we are giving up freedoms that made the U.S. unique. We overlook the unintended consequences (?) of relative morals and lock on the hurt and hate from something that happened in the past. If there is a Convention of the States, will it secure the Constitution, or further whitewash our past? Will the apparent effort to derail the fossil fuel industries result in electric vehicles affordable to all, or a wider span between the haves and have-nots?

Maybe we ought to be asking who is steering the change.