THE DAILY TRAVESTY | Clean Your Garage
THE DAILY TRAVESTY for March 17, 2000
    Volume 1, Issue 51
 
 
CLEAN YOUR GARAGE
By Tucker Lieberman
 
So you've seen that gasoline prices have gone up from $1 to $1.50 per gallon, and you've heard that Congress is thinking on temporarily lifting the 4.3% gasoline tax to ease the ache on the consumer.  What program would be underfunded by the removal of the tax?  Transportation.  The intention is to enable us to buy more gas so that (a) we can drive more miles on worse roads, and (b) we can drive more solo mileage than public transportation mileage.  I know these things in my dreams.

Now I'll admit where I'm coming from.  I'm an environmentalist--yes, I actually believe that the earth is sacred and vital to our lives--and I don't own a car, nor will I ever own a car.  People tell me that's an impossibility.  "How will you drive around if you don't own a car?"  Um, I won't drive around, that's the point.  How do you think people survived in the ten millennia of human history that pre-dated internal combustion engines?  I don't subscribe to the contemporary American ethos "don't-live-where-you-work-and-don't-carpool-because-that's-tacky".  Either I am going to live where I work or I am going to know my neighbors and ride with them.  If the area is not walkable or bikable, I won't move there in the first place.

To tell it true:  The right to cheap gas is not guaranteed to you in the founding stapled papers of this country.  Gluttonous gasoline use, in fact, has caused way bad problems.  One is the psychological effect of solo car driving which is isolation, competition, stress.  Another is the fragmentation of land which is tantamount to total destruction of ecosystems and, I would argue, is lonely for people and hella ugly, though we try to deny it.  Another problem is the war in Iraq.  Few people know that the US and Britain bomb Iraq daily.  A million and a half children have starved to death in the economic siege and the once-prosperous country has been devastated, left without education or healthcare.  After ten years of daily bombing, Saddam Hussein is still alive, so the question is:  Who are the bombs hitting?  Everyone knows that the bombs are about oil.  The President wages this war because he believes that Americans are greedy and care more about their automobiles than whether the genocide in Iraq continues.  He thinks Americans are too self-obsessed and lazy to make any lifestyle changes that would reduce the national motive to bomb and starve innocent Iraqis.  The President, unfortunately, is correct--but we can change that fact.  All we have to do is start caring, start giving a shit at the very least, and take the initiative to restructure our habits. 
 
And, last but not least, we have a global warming problem.  Yes, the temperature has only increased by a fraction of a degree, but if you're a species who cares about a fraction of a degree, it's a life or death situation.  An increase of only four to seven degrees would bring us back to the late Cretaceous type of warmth when the T-Rex was around.  There are natural temperature fluctuations that come and go with the ice ages and personally I feel that it's a good idea not to mimic them.  The deal with artificial global warming is that we don't know how bad it is until it happens.  By the way, for the unscientifically inclined, global warming is caused by the emission of greenhouse gases such as CO2 (largely caused by the combustion of carbon-based fossil fuels) which hang around in the atmosphere and prevent the planet's heat from escaping back into space, which is why it's called the "greenhouse effect."  We do need some greenhouse gases to keep us from being an ice cube, but the earth oughtn't be a sauna, either.  Gaia did a perfectly good job of regulating herself until some wise-ass primates decided to burn all the gloppy stuff under the Earth's crust.  You can solve the global warming problem by planting a tree which converts the CO2 into solid carbon and oxygen gas.  Or you can solve it by not burning fossil fuels in the first place.  The rise in the price of gasoline is one solution--a capitalistic one--that may encourage lower consumption and encourage creative innovation in low-impact transportation.  That innovation doesn't just apply to white-coat physicists, it applies to us too.  I mean the kind of innovation that occurs when you clean your garage and discover a bicycle.

Lowering gas prices, whether by bitching and moaning at the Middle Eastern leaders or by reducing the 4.3% American sales tax, is not what our discourse should be about.  We ought to be discussing how to develop a workable, sustainable system of energy and transportation.  Our present infrastructure--yes, including the infrastructure of our lives--is not sustainable and I'm really not sure it's even workable in the sense of making us meaningfully happy.  As an environmentalist, I am not anti-development.  I am quite pro-development.  But the key word is sustainability.  If it's unsustainable, it's not progress, it's just another lifestyle that alienates us from the earth and is a giant contrived excuse to be irresponsible, which isn't our deepest happiness. 
 
I'm not anti-hedonism either.  Personal pleasure certainly has a role to play.  But I would caution anyone against adopting an "ism" of any sort, including hedonism, as the guiding principle of your life.  Dogma limits your thought and your potential to change.  In the case of the American obsession with personal comfort, an allegiance to this type of hedonism prevents us from seeing any sort of environmental solution that involves personal initiative (because, honestly, who's willing to get off his ass?  Go hug a tree and bring me a beer, I only care about the genocide in Iraq if I can see it from my armchair.) 
 
Kahlil Gibran wrote that "comfort, and the lust for comfort, enters the house a guest, then becomes a host, and then a master."  There's nothing wrong with seeking comfort, but comfort should only be one of your goals, not the sole conductor of your thought that prevents you from seeing other angles and new solutions.  I mean, for example, sex is nice, but there's something to be said for occasionally thinking between your ears instead of between your legs.  To make a change towards a sustainable, peaceful, healthy society, you have to be willing to give up your old assurance of comfort and try something new that may temporarily be uncomfortable and require a sacrifice, but will ultimately give you, your children, and your global friends a greater happiness.  This is why we have intelligence, to make these hard choices.  Liberation is never won or achieved by people seeking their own comfort.  Comfort is the unchallenged status quo.  We are all born into a certain set of paradigms.  Now, opening our minds to free ourselves from those paradigms is a painful birthing process, and stepping out and speaking our truths involves risk and sacrifice.  To live by your truths, and to enlist your truths in the pursuit of peace--this is the raw stuff of life.  This is the mess and the hard choices and the grit and the guts.  But it is also the glory and the freedom.  Ultimately, if we want to liberate ourselves, we cannot let comfort be our master.  I'll leave you with some positive examples of people who are making the choice.

In Freiburg, Germany, there is a 280-home development on a former military base, called the Vauban, where cars are not permitted.  This isn't because Germany is any less car-happy than the US.  It's because people decided to make it happen.  They can let their children play in the street and they don't have to deal with noise or air pollution.  People who gave up their cars for the first time discovered that they did less running around and only went on important errands.  This project was achieved despite a German law that requires developers to have a parking space for each living unit; Vauban solved the problem by building a huge parking garage outside the 94-acre development.  There are 20 such projects in Germany.  A 600-apartment auto-free Austrian development was completed in 1998.  Another development is slated for summer 2000 in Scotland.  In September 1999, France had a voluntary (and successful) "day without cars."  Italy has had several no-car days.  Many European business districts are pedestrian-only.

These are some ideas.  No, my point is not to move to Europe.  My point is to think it, demand it, do it.  There are wants and there are needs, and then again, there are wants and there are needs.  We need not confuse our needs and wants and I doubt we want to confuse our wants and needs.  What I really want, for one, is sustainable energy.