Humans are really smart and really dumb at the same time.
In ancient days, they build great temples that we still marvel at today:
The people then were smart in that they expressed their beliefs and their morality in sophisticated architecture and compelling myth, but they were dumb in that they basically used these places to set animals on fire for Zeus.
Eventually, paganism went out of fashion, and it seemed primitive and idiotic when compared to monotheism, which is the single-ring drivetrain of religions. (Though some people, like the Jews, were riding single-ring drivetrains long before they were cool–and of course some people still appreciate the beauty of paganism, just like plenty of retrogrouches still love their triples.) So the people built new temples for that, and they were also marvelous:
The people then were smart in that they expressed their beliefs and their morality in sophisticated architecture and compelling myth, but they were dumb in that they thought their myth was inherently superior to the old myths. See, the stupid ancients thought there were lots and lots of gods that birthed babies out of their heads, whereas the single-ring devotees believed there was only one God and he was always looking for a good excuse to smite you, which is obvioiusly a lot more sensible.
Now it’s the 21st century, and we’re still really smart and really dumb. We don’t talk about “god” at all anymore; instead, we talk about “science,” and so we spend lots of money building temples to that:
It’s easy to make fun of religion, but it’s important to remember that it’s not meant to be taken literally:
While there’s certainly a lot of bloatware in the various holy books, the best stuff is beautiful and insightful and frames the world and our existence in a way that still underpins our culture and offers us limitless insight even today. The problem with religion is that it’s administered by people, and people are imperfect and insecure. Take Jesus, for example. Whether or not he actually ever existed (does it really matter?), he’s more than all right with me; he’s absolutely fantastic! People still live their lives according to his teachings, and with good reason. But his marketing team was insecure, and so they had to tack on all this stuff about him coming back from the dead (not to mention all the political stuff about the Jews and the Romans), when instead they should have simply had confidence in the material, because the Sermon on the Mount is great stuff. Sure, maybe part of the reason the Beatitudes stuck is that they killed him off in the end, but did they really need to bring him back on top of it? It’s a bit much is all I’m saying.
Modern religion pushes it in the same way. Take “climate,” a word that has lost all meaning. If you remove the word “climate” from any passage, not only do you lose nothing in terms of meaning, but the passage is actually stronger for it:
See?
“The Innovation Hub will be a signature NYCEDC initiative to advance rapid technology adoption in NYC,” the website states.
The Brooklyn Army Terminal already serves as a space for companies to test and trial new technology.
According to the EDC, companies participating in the Innovation Pilot Program have access to a “live environment” with roadways, water and electrical systems and more in which to test and develop their technology and products.
The first one sounds like a boondoggle, but the second one makes me go, “Take my money!”
In cycling, the word “gravel” works the same way. Helmets are now “gravel helmets:”
Socks are now “gravel socks:”
Pumps are now “gravel pumps:”
And so on.
Hey, you may laugh, but go ahead and try to use a non-gravel pump on gravel, you’ll drive it right into the ground like a stake:
Also, you can’t laugh at “gravel” everything and not laugh at “climate” everything. Like gravel, “climate” has become a marketing term, nothing more, and like the word gravel I now cringe every time I hear it. When you turn a word into a prefix you slap onto everything willy-nilly you cheapen it through overuse and it undermines itself:
Of course we should be stewards of the land and not pollute and always seek more efficient fuels and all that other stuff we’ve known for thousands of years. But not only are these people pissing on your head and telling you it’s raining, but they’re also telling you their piss is more rain than has ever fallen in the history of humanity, and that if you don’t change your evil ways the world is going to end–and it works, because people think worrying all the time makes them smart, which is why publications like the Guardian exist, and why policymakers can justify all sorts of wacky stuff on the basis of “climate.” Not that we shouldn’t invest in technology, but how the hell is this thing going to bring the city five million jobs?
The entire city population is eight and a half million people. From what I can tell from two seconds of research, about 25% of that is people under 16. That leaves a little more than six million people who can actually work. Are we to believe that five million of them are going to work in green jobs? There aren’t even that many jobs in the whole city;
Okay, maybe that doesn’t include municipal jobs, and maybe once every industry in the city becomes sufficiently “green” then every job will technically be a green job–like if your local Chipotle meets some sort of “net zero” target and you wrap burritos there then TA-DAAH! you’re now working a green job. I dunno.
And again, I get investing in technology and being at the cutting edge of whatever, but I thought we were already building a “climate center” on Governor’s Island?
All I’m saying is this seems like a suspiciously large number of climate centers. Governor’s Island, the whole Brooklyn waterfront… Also, this vision of the future seems completely divorced from what’s happening out there right now. The city’s not in a great place. The other day I boarded a rush-hour subway. On my line a typical train consists of, I believe, ten cars. Of those, six were occupied by what in Newspeak are currently called “unhoused individuals,” and were otherwise devoid of passengers as in most cases the occupants had clearly been using them to relieve themselves, as it naturally follows that the unhoused are also un-bathroomed. So basically 60% of a rush-hour subway train was a rolling flophouse. Most platforms outside of what urbanists call the “CBD” were also inhabited by various numbers of the undomiciled, and arriving at my destination station I held my breath as it was filled with the cloying stench of the unhoused, de-toileted, un-showered and non-deodorized person who was currently occupying it.
This is not me making fun of the homeless or even proposing or criticizing any solutions; I’m simply making the point that we have a bad habit of cloaking unpleasant truths in new language, and that now would be a good time to wake up and smell the human shit. Only if you literally walk around with your eyes closed and pinching your nose (or I guess you get driven around in a city-owned SUV like many officials are) would you think that futuristic Gattaca-like facilities on tiny islands should be a priority now–unless the idea is that once all this is done there will be five million green jobs and all the people pissing and shitting on subway trains will find themselves gainfully employed in solving the world’s energy problems and averting the horrible specter of climate change forever:
Of course, the subway isn’t all bad, and thanks to the migrant crisis it’s never been easier to buy candy from a child during your commute, so there is that:
I guess the climate center will at least distract people from the migrant camp at Floyd Bennett Field.
And yes, all this stuff–“climate,” homelessness, migrants–is politically charged, but let’s look at it agnostically. This city is a roiling, seething, dynamic, exciting, infuriating, ugly, and beautiful pit of commerce. There are always people eager to declare it dead, me included, but everyone from the recent college graduate from a comfortable suburban home to families who trek thousands of miles through rainforests comes here for the opportunities it sill provides. In that sense I guess it sort of doesn’t matter what the city spends its money on, because there are always more than enough people to take that money, and not only will they build whatever ridiculous extravagance the city has come up with this week (like a shiny “climate center” on an island, or another shiny one on the waterfront), but they’ll also build something for themselves with the money they earn. I doubt anything useful will come out of a climate center itself, but I also understand that you don’t see the stupidity of burning an ox for Zeus when you look at ancient ruins; instead you marvel at the ingenuity of the ancients, and the manner in which these constructions embody the beauty of human aspiration. Similarly, maybe someone will marvel at these climate centers, even if their only real practical purpose is in moving money around, and even if the biggest “growth sector” in green jobs is delivering food to people on e-bikes.
I do think there’s a danger in not calling things what they are, whether it’s making sleeping in your own filth sound like a lifestyle choice, or of always attributing weather and incompetence to a “climate emergency.” I especially think when we say we need to get people out of cars or build a bike lane for “the climate” instead of for all the actual reasons to get people out of cars or build bike lanes, we do bikes and the people who ride them a disservice.
But mostly I’m happy it’s the weekend and that I can go for a ride.
I love you,
–Tan Tenovo
