Hope you're well. This all started because I'm articulating what I gather about what you believe. I don't know if I'm right or not. The first one of these letters was pretty hard to write. It made me face some very grim ideas about my possible future, and arguably about myself. I had to think about what it would be like to be a single mother, or to give up a kid that would come back to me later. I had to assume that I'm lazy and that what I'm trying to do with my life was meaningless.
That was kind of a bummer, but there is some good news in your reality. The planet is fine, remember? According to Pew Research, 11% of conservative republicans believe that scientists understand the cause climate change, and 18% believe that they understand whether it's happening at all. This is conservative republicans; the numbers swing a little higher to more moderate demographics, but I haven't written any of them a letter yet. The conservative view of climate change is apparently changing albeit slowly; it's gone from being a hoax to simply not being addressed. As an aside, here's a very lovely, articulate and well thought out viewpoint on the importance of and methods for addressing climate change from a conservative standpoint. It has little to do with this article but I want to point out that while some statistics point to a great deal of ignorance, it's not a hard and fast rule about You.
So in this world, we have a big, sturdy planet to deal with. The economy will experience a boost, particularly in rural communities where industries that have been historically restricted due to their environmental impact will see a return. There will be a new era of clean coal and shale energy.
I imagine this will lead to an increasingly widening rift between liberal and conservatives geographically; in that, I mean more liberal states will attempt to implement environmentally friendly actions on a more centralized level, and more conservative areas will become more welcoming of more traditional energy sources. I don't really know what that means for a state like Colorado. We will be fighting each other. I see very little progress getting done within our state considered for how progressive it is.
Again, this is assuming that you are right, that there is no correlation between human influence and climate change. All of the protesting has been noise. Science has merit not only for higher questioning but for less input as to what happens in government. The only thing that interests me about this, that I can say for your reality is that science chiefly requires a lot of evidence in order to change its opinion across the community.
Not only that, science has often had to concede that it was incorrect as new theories are developed and proven. Removing them from government means that further research on the issue will most likely be stunted if not abandoned. Even if we are unsure about the link between the climate and our effect on it, we most likely won't have the resources dedicated to finding out.
This poses questions for me about science's role as a whole. Because it will have less of a voice in the political world, presumably less money will be spent on it, and that's a dangerous idea. Already the most appealing area of scientific research seems to be improved warfare, so I can only imagine how much further that will stretch. Research will be funded only by for-profit or non-profit entities, of which I'm unsure what the standards of accuracy will be held to. I will admit I'm unfamiliar with what they are currently held to, it just seems easier to have a sway on an issue of discovery when the research is being funded by a company that has to push a product. It seems to me that it would become easy for what is considered to be true to become much more relative.
The US government currently spends the most out of any country on scientific funding, followed by China. If we are concerned about a threat from the Chinese economy and their control over our debt, it seems counter intuitive to decide to reduce government funding in science, as that's typically the birthplace of innovation, and it isn't for pure curiosity.
I'm glad that the air will be fresh and clean no matter what factories and energy plants are developed around us. It's a huge relief to know that the water will not have to be treated as it travels through our pipes, regardless of their age, and we will be safe to drink it. We'll have to be, given that our healthcare returns to being privatized. Since no one will potentially be getting sick, no one has to worry about it. I have to admit I like that idea, if in this area you're right, I will be glad. The fact that I don't think you are makes everything I've just written feel like putting wallpaper over a condemned building, and trying to sell it as a "reimagined" townhome.
The last topic I mentioned that we disagree about is the one that makes me feel the most uncomfortable. I also don't really know how to address it, because it becomes a very sketchy view of human life. If it were hard enough to determine that an embryo definitely is a person, then how we decide that some races are people but not "as good of" people or what exactly it is, seems nearly impossible for me to untangle. I don't know how to unpack this one in my head.
Okay, so there is reverse-racism that allows people of minority status to get picked over white people through affirmative action. Likewise, people in poverty, who are people of color, typically, are using government handouts in order to mooch off of everyone else because they are lazy. They could stop being poor if they worked harder. People are sneaking into the country in order to continue mooching off our government, and therefore weakening our economy. They aren't marginalized, they're just not very good people. They don't need help, they just have to want to help themselves.
Police brutality, if I can understand it in your terms, is more an indicator of our government creating a militant police state that is meant to restrict and control its citizens and has nothing to do with matters of color. Despite going on trial for these murders, there was little to no jail time in 97% of cases. Most of the time, these cops are just doing their jobs. The fact that a lot of these people have been unarmed, or are minorities are just unfortunate coincidences.
Is this what you believe? I find this incredibly muddy. I decided to omit any hypothetical addressing anyone's belief that their race is genuinely superior because it's too hard for me to try and put together, it's too arbitrary. These assumptions listed I can at least cobble together with some rudimentary economic understanding. I could see an angry parent whose son or daughter didn't go to college because some institution wanted to have more diverse demographics. I can see people worried about their jobs and supporting their families under heavy taxes that help families that they don't know and have never met. Those aren't baseless beliefs to me. Racism, in the flagrant arrogance and xenophobia that comes from assuming one race is inherently better, is. In any case, I'm finding it extremely difficult to understand who you are and where you're coming from on this. I wonder if there is no unity on this front and that's why it's so difficult. Maybe there just isn't a consensus and you find this conflicting, too.
Let's get back to your world, shall we? Illegal immigration is a currently huge threat to our economy, but we should be seeing a boom in our renewed energy plans. Presumably we will continue to see an economic resurgence as illegal immigrants are deported. I would like to think that the process won't be as dystopian and dark to include people "hiding" undocumented families at the risk of some kind of legal penalty.
I don't see how this won't lead to some level of profiling. Applying for jobs will require birth certificates and naturalization papers, but only if your last name sounds funny. College applications will become more fair in that no preference will be given to any ethnicity. I think that's fine, but I would hope that names and any identifying information about a person would be left out, and then we can see what the random numbers will produce.
There is more good news, too! We will be unburdened by the welfare system. Taxes will fade out and we'll be able to keep larger portions of our hard earned money. Single mothers, low income families and people stuck in impoverished neighborhoods will be able to become self reliant. Since abortion will be illegal, or at the very least complicated, there will likely be a rise in single mothers. Without the safety net of SNAP, TANF or other assistance programs, they'll be able to thrive as they find time for work, higher education, and childcare as they make rent, pay for food and education through their food industry jobs. No longer will there be people mooching off the system, some number of them will be dead.
People who are homeless (homelessness is statistically more likely to be transitional, a product of high rent, low wage or unemployment and not some greater life path) will be able to benefit from mission beds and church organizations. They will have no permanent establishment to help them get off of drugs, shower regularly or institute any kind of routine that might help them reintegrate into society. They will rely on their community's compassion and themselves to be able to become upstanding citizens again.
Inauguration day is tomorrow, and this is what I believe will happen in your world. I don't even know how to portray it without looking like Chicken Little because I am genuinely terrified. I don't know if it was my youth, apathy or just a much lesser sense of threat, but I didn't feel this afraid when Bush won. I wasn't much of a supporter of Democrats this time around, and while I tried to be patient, to see how much of the rhetoric was flamboyant and empty, I only became more and more concerned. I disliked the hysteria calling Trump a fascist, disliked the unverified media leaks (who is that for?) and I want to see this be fine.
I think what makes me afraid, what makes the next four years look so grim is the inevitable loss of human life. Trump has a passionate and outspoken viewpoint that inevitably leads to the struggle and death of human beings. Whether or not you hold his priorities important, it's the lack of empathy for human life that's disturbing. That's what I see if you're correct; that some human life is simply of less value than others. That there is no reason to help people, that there is never a situation in which someone can't help themselves. I don't know that you're wrong, I just know that the kind of world where that's true would make me miserable.
I hope you, whoever you are, see flaws in my logic about your view. I hope you can explain to me that this isn't what you expect to happen. I just want to know. I guess that's what we find out starting tomorrow.
About A Blog
I'm a Denver Comedian, occasional cartoonist and person of interest to someone, probably. These articles are really too long.