![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chhotiiDear friends,
On July 1 Harvard opened its elections for the Board of Overseers and Board of Directors. As alumni of any school within Harvard, we have the opportunity to have a say in the governance of this very influential institution. Please, if you haven't voted yet, put this on your to-do list. I would suggest that you take a look at the slate of candidates endorsed by Harvard Forward, and look at the Harvard Forward platform. The website is here: https://www.harvardforward.org/
For me, the crucial issue in this election is whether Harvard will take a stand against the continued trashing of our planet by divesting from the fossil fuel sector. I realize that divestment is an indirect way to try to influence energy companies. In terms of actually affecting these companies, its value might only be symbolic. So, why bother with divestment? If someone will inevitbily profit from fossil fuels, then why not Harvard? Let's run a thought experiment: What if Harvard had investments in companies that participated in slave trading? You'd want Harvard to drop those like a hot poker. I'm not equating fossil fuel extraction with slavery, but just pointing out that at some level of moral repugnance, divestment becomes compelling, regardless of practical or economic arguments.
Looking at today's hot weather and the reports of unbelievable Arctic melting, sadly so predictable decades ago, I believe that the time has come to regard investment in fossil fuel extraction as deeply morally repugnant. I know, I know; we're all still putting gasoline in our cars. There's quite a bit of momentum in energy usage throughout our economy and infrastructure. We can't turn on a dime and electrify everything overnight. But-- to continue the "momentum" metaphor-- humanity is headed towards driving over a cliff. Rather than trying to brake and steer away from the cliff edge (as a few of us crazy crazy environmentalists are trying to do), an investment in fossil fuels represents an interest in holding the wheel straight and continuing to press hard on the gas pedal. I would call that evil. Why does Harvard-- an institution that clearly believes in science, and whose purpose is to prepare its students for the future-- insist on continuing to be a party to evil?
I recognize that, while not embracing divestment, Harvard is taking steps towards making its investment portfolio carbon-neutral. That's awesome! I do think that those efforts will be extremely useful in motivating corporations to take a look at their sustainability practices. I applaud what Harvard is doing in that regard. But I don't think this deflates the argument for divestment. Harvard could do both-- both make the big symbolic statement of divestment, signaling to the world that the fossil fuel business is just not cool any more; and continue to press for a sustainable economy overall. We need to do both. We need to do everything we can. With these preposterously high temperatures in the Arctic this summer, Earth is shouting at us to react to this crisis as an emergency.
Thanks for taking "if you don't vote, you can't complain" to heart. If you sympathize with my agitating for a livable planet, can you also pass the word on about Harvard Forward to other Harvard alumni? Thanks!
Alex
On July 1 Harvard opened its elections for the Board of Overseers and Board of Directors. As alumni of any school within Harvard, we have the opportunity to have a say in the governance of this very influential institution. Please, if you haven't voted yet, put this on your to-do list. I would suggest that you take a look at the slate of candidates endorsed by Harvard Forward, and look at the Harvard Forward platform. The website is here: https://www.harvardforward.org/
For me, the crucial issue in this election is whether Harvard will take a stand against the continued trashing of our planet by divesting from the fossil fuel sector. I realize that divestment is an indirect way to try to influence energy companies. In terms of actually affecting these companies, its value might only be symbolic. So, why bother with divestment? If someone will inevitbily profit from fossil fuels, then why not Harvard? Let's run a thought experiment: What if Harvard had investments in companies that participated in slave trading? You'd want Harvard to drop those like a hot poker. I'm not equating fossil fuel extraction with slavery, but just pointing out that at some level of moral repugnance, divestment becomes compelling, regardless of practical or economic arguments.
Looking at today's hot weather and the reports of unbelievable Arctic melting, sadly so predictable decades ago, I believe that the time has come to regard investment in fossil fuel extraction as deeply morally repugnant. I know, I know; we're all still putting gasoline in our cars. There's quite a bit of momentum in energy usage throughout our economy and infrastructure. We can't turn on a dime and electrify everything overnight. But-- to continue the "momentum" metaphor-- humanity is headed towards driving over a cliff. Rather than trying to brake and steer away from the cliff edge (as a few of us crazy crazy environmentalists are trying to do), an investment in fossil fuels represents an interest in holding the wheel straight and continuing to press hard on the gas pedal. I would call that evil. Why does Harvard-- an institution that clearly believes in science, and whose purpose is to prepare its students for the future-- insist on continuing to be a party to evil?
I recognize that, while not embracing divestment, Harvard is taking steps towards making its investment portfolio carbon-neutral. That's awesome! I do think that those efforts will be extremely useful in motivating corporations to take a look at their sustainability practices. I applaud what Harvard is doing in that regard. But I don't think this deflates the argument for divestment. Harvard could do both-- both make the big symbolic statement of divestment, signaling to the world that the fossil fuel business is just not cool any more; and continue to press for a sustainable economy overall. We need to do both. We need to do everything we can. With these preposterously high temperatures in the Arctic this summer, Earth is shouting at us to react to this crisis as an emergency.
Thanks for taking "if you don't vote, you can't complain" to heart. If you sympathize with my agitating for a livable planet, can you also pass the word on about Harvard Forward to other Harvard alumni? Thanks!
Alex
