There is an old saw that defines the difference between ignorance and stupidity. "Ignorance is an accidental condition that can be cured by acquiring the necessary information and knowledge. Stupidity is a chronic and voluntary condition based upon a choice to remain ignorant."
That adage is borne out by the public statement by Bush that he will refuse to watch the documentary by Al Gore that is reputed to be one of the most thoughtful, balanced and educational films available on the current scientific analysis of global warming. The curt response from the White house suggests that Bush already knows as much as he needs to know about global warming. He rejected the Tokyo Protocol and has supported legislation to weaken restrictions on air pollution and other initiatives that might help alleviate greenhouse emission contributions to the impending global warming crisis.
Of course, the response by Bush is not unexpected. His character in office has been to make a decision and then cobble together the "facts" and group of sycophants that tend to support his prejudgment, then refuse to listen to anyone or anything that disagrees with his decision. His argument for "staying the course" in Iraq, despite the reality of a country descended into chaos and civil war during Bush's "strategic mission" to topple Saddam Hussein, is that he made the decision to invade and that therefore it must be the right decision. Any action that suggests that he was wrong, misguided or misinformed is just plain nonsense. No additional information, changed circumstances, evidence of failure or other "discouraging word" is going to change his mind.
Unfortunately, history is replete with stories of many campaigns gone to ruin in the wake of such hard-headed and foolish "leaders." No matter how "epic" the tales, the end result has always been ruin, death and destruction in massive proportions and unnecessary loss of lives. From Nero's Rome to the Charge of the Light Brigade to Custer to the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor to Viet Nam to Iraq, they all bear the same stamp of wasted lives caused by the foolish and willful ignorance of the commander in chief. In each case, the so called "leader" held fast to a delusional reality that was so far detached from the real world that the only possible result was destruction when their folly collided with reality.
In the case of Global Warming, the stakes are not just the victory or loss of a battle or a war, but planetary in scope. Can we afford to be "led" by a commander in chief who prides himself on ignoring factual information that could inform an intelligent decision on policies of such monumental importance to mankind?
No comments:
Post a Comment