Hiroshima and Nagasaki Revisited as Trump Provokes N. Korea's Kim Jong-un?

On this day, 1945, the US dropped a nuclear bomb on Nagasaki, instantly killing about 40,000 people, having dropped the world's first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima three days earlier. The horror has lived on in everybody's minds and hearts.

Yet yesterday, Donald Trump threatened N. Korea with "fire and fury" over its nuclear capacity and its own threat to destroy the US. The world watches, tense, as this out of control, intellectually challenged man, unleashes his ego, too narcissistic to understand the consequences and how close he's pushing the whole world towards nuclear confrontation.

When asked what the government was going to do about N. Korea a short while ago, he said vacuously, "We'll manage it, we'll manage it." He wouldn't take any more questions on the subject. Because he didn't have a clue.

It's been 201 days of this inept, dysfunctional American president with severe personality disorders, living in a private bubble utterly detached from reality. Surrounded by bottom-feeders and acolytes, scrabbling for power like a bunch of starving hyenas attacking a bloody carcass, snarling and tearing at each other. The leader of the free world isolating America from international trade, separating it from the free and the just.

An ultra conservative government, largely driven by Evangelical Christian 'principles', dragging the most powerful democracy back into pre Civil Rights days wherever it can, back into discrimination, unfair treatment, bigotry, sexism and xenophobia. A climate change denier in charge of the environment.

The list goes on. It's endless now. Over 200 days of human rights violations, scandals, vulgarities, lies, corrupted souls,  hiring and firing at the whim of a sick man addicted to himself and his TV enablers. Furiously trying to cover his Russian connection tracks and losing the battle fast. Swamped by the relentless push of 5 major investigations. Desperately trying to distract, failing abysmally.

Hemorrhaging popularity and trust, even in his ever dwindling base. The whole world worrying about how he'll cope with a real, international disaster. And now it's about to happen, only he's the author of it.

Nuclear confrontation has suddenly and by degrees become a reality for all of us, as the sick man with tiny fingers recklessly provokes the world's most frightening sociopath, Who, it turns out, has the capacity to target the US with intercontinental ballistic missiles that have miniaturized nuclear warheads attached. It's alarming how so many military analysts are saying that Kim Jong-un isn't insane, he's strategic, he knows what he's doing, and he's homicidal but not suicidal.

He's just saber-rattling, saying that he'll destroy America. The only way to deal with him is to push back, show him that America means business. Threaten to annihilate N. Korea. He'll buckle. He knows that a full-on US attack will destroy his country. He doesn't want that. He just wants to be safe, he wants a deterrent, and to be treated like one of the big guys at the table.

They were wrong about how developed N. Korea's nuclear capacity is. The Washington Post reveal surprised everybody.  Anything from 25 to 60 missiles that could reach the west coast of the US and possibly even New York. But they're not wrong about Kim Jong-un?

The worry is that these military analysts are still burying their heads in the sand. The problem with sociopaths is that they don't function the way most of us do. They don't have a stabilizing component in their brains. They can be supremely logical, sure; but their wires are crossed, and their rationale for behaving anti-socially makes sense to them. We have a prime example in Donald Trump.

Watching Kim Jong-un survey his gigantic weapons displays, and his mechanized, mind-vacated, supremely controllable puppet troops and citizens, it doesn't take a genius to see orgasmic satisfaction that is insane. Out of control. Push him too far with threats and there's no guarantee that he won't lose it and push back with an attack because it will give him an orgasm. It'll be too late then, as American cities burn à la Nagasaki and Hiroshima, to say, Damn! We were wrong. Too late, also, for Trump voters—and die-hard Bernie Sanders fans—to realize they made a mistake.

Some of them might even be dead. Or mutilated beyond recognition. Or weeping over their screaming children, helpless to save them. We were all concerned about the fate of the planet because Trump and his government are in denial about climate change. We may not have to worry about that any more.

Global Reaction to Trump's Withdrawal of the US from the Paris Deal

Donald Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has drawn fierce protest and criticism in the US and around the globe, proving that today's world is more intent on unity and progress than on isolationism and destruction, and that, notwithstanding the alternative narrative created by fossil fuel giants and their Republican puppet politicians, global warming is acknowledged to be a real and present danger.

The decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord is a threat to the planet. A great nation should lead and be unafraid.

— John Lewis (@repjohnlewis) June 1, 2017

Trump's idea that he could negotiate a better deal for the US was quickly quashed. There is no better deal, because each country that has committed to the accord retains the right to set their own targets. The mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, called Trump's decision a "dramatic mistake", and leaders of Germany, France and Italy committed to work together, with the Paris deal as "a cornerstone" of their cooperation.

"We deem the momentum generated in Paris in December 2015 irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies."

We all share the same responsibility: make our planet great again. pic.twitter.com/IIWmLEtmxj

— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) June 1, 2017

Japan's Foreign Ministry, New Zealand's climate change Minister Paula Bennett, Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, expressed their disapproval of disappointment in Trump, and reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris deal.

In the US, Climate Mayors, a network of 188 US mayors (up from 75 on May 27), have committed to adopt, honor and uphold the Paris climate agreement goals. 

Also known as Mayors National Climate Action Agenda, or MNCAA, the group represents over 54 million Americans in red and blue states. They are working locally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and supporting efforts for binding federal and global-level policy making.

MNCAA recently released an open letter to President Trump in protest of his anti-environment protection actions. To sign the statement, or for more information, email info@climate-mayors.org or visit http://www.climate-mayors.org.

"As 180 US Mayors representing 51 million Americans, we will adopt, honor, and uphold the commitments to the goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement. We will intensify efforts to meet each of our cities’ current climate goals, push for new action to meet the 1.5 degrees Celsius target, and work together to create a 21st century clean energy economy.

We will continue to lead. We are increasing investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency. We will buy and create more demand for electric cars and trucks. We will increase our efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, create a clean energy economy, and stand for environmental justice. And if the President wants to break the promises made to our allies enshrined in the historic Paris Agreement, we’ll build and strengthen relationships around the world to protect the planet from devastating climate risks.

The world cannot wait — and neither will we."

City Hall is green tonight. Boston stands with the environment. We must protect our future. #ParisAccord pic.twitter.com/yTL5albn2f

— Mayor Marty Walsh (@marty_walsh) June 2, 2017

Tonight the Wilson Building turns green in honor of DC's continued commitment to the #ParisAgreement. #ClimateMayors pic.twitter.com/beqQyVEISz

— Mayor Muriel Bowser (@MayorBowser) June 2, 2017

A historic mistake. The world is moving forward together on climate change. Paris withdrawal leaves American workers & families behind.

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) June 1, 2017

US #ParisAgreement decision does not, will not & cannot change the unstoppable drive towards a clean energy economy https://t.co/TNw99Hm5lS pic.twitter.com/XMGfgPJ1ol

— Richard Branson (@richardbranson) June 2, 2017

Am departing presidential councils. Climate change is real. Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 1, 2017

As a matter of principle, I've resigned from the President's Council over the #ParisAgreement withdrawal.

— Robert Iger (@RobertIger) June 1, 2017

Bloomberg Philanthropies will pay $15 million to the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change (which coordinates the Paris Agreement), to cover the US share of the convention's operating budget.

"The pledge aims to fill a significant funding gap that comes as a result of President Donald Trump's announced withdrawal from the Paris agreement and proposed steep budget cuts for international programs, including on climate" .

The Mayor of Pittsburgh responded smartly to Trump tweeting that he was "elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris." 

Fact: Hillary Clinton received 80% of the vote in Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh stands with the world & will follow Paris Agreement @HillaryClinton https://t.co/cibJyT7MAK

— bill peduto (@billpeduto) June 1, 2017

Arnold Schwarzenegger's message to Donald Trump says it all.

BREAKING: Arnold Schwarzenegger has a blunt message for Donald Trump. #ParisAgreement pic.twitter.com/YI8fcxEeox

— ATTN: (@attn) June 2, 2017

A World in Disbelief as Trump Pulls US Out of Paris Accord

Embed from Getty Images

"A year and a half ago, the world came together in Paris around the first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course and protect the world we leave to our children.

It was steady, principled American leadership on the world stage that made that achievement possible.  It was bold American ambition that encouraged dozens of other nations to set their sights higher as well... 

Simply put, the private sector already chose a low-carbon future.  And for the nations that committed themselves to that future, the Paris Agreement opened the floodgates for businesses, scientists, and engineers to unleash high-tech, low-carbon investment and innovation on an unprecedented scale.

The nations that remain in the Paris Agreement will be the nations that reap the benefits in jobs and industries created. I believe the United States of America should be at the front of the pack. But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this Administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we’ve got." Fmr President Barack Obama

On Thursday, after a week of indecision and keeping the world in suspense, and acting against the advice of 22 senators, Rex Tillerson, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, Donald Trump breezed onto the lawn at the Rose Garden and announced that the US would pull out of the Paris Accord. Steve Bannon, Reince Priebus and Scott Pruit had won the day. 

The world is used to hearing America described as the most sophisticated democracy in the world, the assumption being that true democracy is the best system for progress in society on every front. Barack Obama's election in 2008 seemed proof of it; it was miraculous that an African American could win the hearts of the majority of voters, in a country long characterized by racism and wealth of opportunity for one race group at the cost of all the others, but African Americans in particular.

That Obama pulled the US back from the brink and went on to achieve what he did for America and the world, despite rank opposition from Republicans, reinforced the idea that this democracy deserved the position of world leader.

There wasn't any doubt in the minds of the majority of people paying attention that President Obama deserved the role and did it proud. Under his Administration the focus of global affairs turned from the bully power of war to the transformative power of diplomacy. No doubt either that First Lady Michelle Obama transformed her role and became a world leader in her own right, championing education, health and children's rights within America and internationally.

This remarkable couple, whose lives and work were driven by a desire to see social equality in every realm, exemplified dignity. The White House was a transformed place. American democracy was safe in their hands. And it was something the world could and did respect.

But now, that same democracy has produced a president who is no better than a corrupted, severely intellectually challenged, if not mentally deranged, banana republic dictator.

Supported by infighting, back-stabbing liars, racists and bigots, (some of whom have zero qualifications for their positions of immense authority), who have no problem sacrificing the health of more than 20 million people, or pushing the world to the brink of potential nuclear confrontation with North Korea. They promote social inequality, bigotry and racism, and are very busy creating a culture of disinformation second only to Vladimir Putin's.

They supported a candidate who ran on exploiting fear, rage, white supremacy hatred and sheer ignorance. A man who had no qualifications to be anything, let alone a president, and who garnered votes by promising to roll back every progressive policy instituted by the Obama Administration. America may be the most sophisticated democratic system on the planet, but perhaps our idea of what that produces needs adjusting if elections can be swayed by foreign powers, if districts can be so gerrymandered that one party can't win, if information that voters rely on to make their decisions is in fact disinformation. 

Democracy is an imperfect system; it's better than pure socialism, but it's a work in progress. As the world gets more and more interconnected, the effects of national elections and the actions of political parties and leaders are felt by citizens of other countries. They can't vote, but they can act. They're mostly democratic countries.

The solution may not lie in democracy. International disbelief at the stupidity of America pulling out of the Paris Accord is matched by resolve to protect our planet at all costs. So China is stepping up, France and Germany are forging a stronger partnership, Europe is girding its loins, and within America, states, cities, counties, and corporations are forging ahead, investing in renewables and in globalization. Stronger together.

Those who are afraid, and who want to go back to a world where fossil fuels can be exploited and the consequences ignored, flex their bully muscles and exert control. But it's a death rattle, and in fact their ship has already sailed. The world is never going back to isolationism, or to using fossil fuels with reckless abandon.

And in reality, it will take years for the US pullout to be effected. In that time, Donald Trump will be gone, and Republicans will be out of power. Damage done will be undone. One step back, two steps forward.

The most sophisticated democracy in the world will have averted its own catastrophic disaster. Whether it will still be world leader is questionable.

If America recedes from the world stage for a while because of the stupidity of a president the majority didn't vote for and are now struggling to get rid of, perhaps it will be a good thing. It will give the country time to get its own house in order. Barack Obama is just getting into his stride, free now from the shackles of the presidency. Hillary Clinton has also come out of the woods. Rep. Adam Schiff is doing a sterling job on the Russia investigation. And the Democratic Party has never been so unified and so focused.

This is not the end of the world.

Trump Rolls Back Environment Protection but Solar Rules. It's the New Gold Rush

It's hard to accept when change is irrevocable. Hard for communities that have relied on an industry for generations to acknowledge that past glory days are over and they're never coming back. 

Coal mining is almost iconic in that regard. Employment in the industry has been declining for a long time, and miners have held onto the hope of a miracle reversal. But between 1920 and 2013, coal mining jobs dropped by almost a whopping 90%. In the same period, increasing mechanization saw production rise from 500 million short tons of coal to 982,677. 

Those who did retain employment clung on, as they did to the idea that the problem was political. In the run-up to the 2016 elections, Donald Trump made a lot of promises about bringing back coal. It won him votes, but it was a callous exploitation of people's fears and insecurity. The promise can never be fulfilled, because mechanization isn't the only challenge facing coal. In the US, and around the world, as coal mining becomes more expensive, solar becomes cheaper. Coal's growth rate declined by -3.4% between 1995 and 2014, whereas solar's increased by 65% for the same period.

In the US, figures for solar employment growth between 2010 and 2016 are a stark reflection of the power of solar throughout the country, and the trend towards the future. 

Once a niche industry, Solar is now mainstream, and can only go in one direction. Bloomberg New Energy Finance predicts that within seven years solar will be the cheapest source of electricity, globally.

Which is good news for those who can embrace change, and who believe scientists' warnings that climate change is caused by global warming. It isn't just something of the future, it's happening now. Oceans are warming, ice caps are melting, unprecedented weather patterns are causing heat waves, violent storms. Toxic air pollution, smog and acid rain are increasingly common in major cities. Carbon dioxide emissions are the biggest contributor.

In America, coal plants are major culprits. Pollution controls help, so long as plants install the technology. Some do, but not all. And now the current US administration is rolling back environment protections, even going so far as talking about withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, the first international acknowledgement that action must be taken now against global warming.

Unfortunate, to say the least, for the world, given that the US is the second largest contributor to global warming. But also unfortunate for Americans, economically. Countries that take the lead on developing alternative energy sources, especially solar and wind, will emerge as global economic leaders. China, whose contribution to global warming is currently double that of the US, could take the lead. Morals, ethics and caring about the planet aside, it's where all the money will be.  

“It’s becoming normal in more and more markets. Every time you double capacity, you reduce the price by 20 percent,” said Adnan Amin, Director General of International Renewable Energy Agency, an intergovernmental group based in Abu Dhabi, quoted in Bloomberg. 

How wonderfully ironic that finally the most money will be made from industries that save the planet. The arguments are all in favor of investing in solar as a clean, efficient and increasingly cost effective energy solution. And there's no argument to continue with coal mining. No argument to invest in new plants either; economically it's becoming the least viable as a source of power. Even the Kentucky Coal Mining Museum in Benham has installed solar panels on its roof, to cut down on electricity costs.

Coal isn't coming back, no matter which way you look at it. Painful as that is for coal-mining communities in the US, the truth is that they have another, better, sustainable option, one that is working for many already. Jobs in the electric power generation sector are mostly being generated by the solar industry now. 

Solar is the new gold rush. Massive corporations that are heavily invested in fossil fuels, with their lobby groups and politicians in their pockets, will have to realize that if they don't get in on the gold rush they'll be eating everybody else's dust.

It's understandable that coal miners are afraid. Change in their industry has been happening for a long time, but it's now hit the point of no return. Of course it's terrifying. But the consolation is that more and more jobs will be generated by alternatives to coal, especially solar, in states that have traditionally relied on coal mining. Miners will learn that there's nothing to be afraid of, and everything to celebrate. More jobs, nicer jobs! Better wages, a brighter future. 

Red Herring Tactics of Climate Change Deniers

Is climate change really happening because of the way we recklessly pollute the earth so we can sustain our status quo, keep our jobs, carry on having access to all the wonderful things the production of which requires that we pollute the air, water and ground? Why take responsibility if the earth can absorb the consequences of our irresponsible actions? 

  

Is every one of the 97% of scientists who have published on climate change a self-serving crook who ignores or hides any evidence that doesn’t prove their point?   

Has the US House Science Committee been right to hold 15 hearings on space exploration in search of aliens and 2 on climate change over the course of the 113th Congress? Is it just for political gain that President Obama is focusing on Climate Change and pushing for tougher laws on fuel emissions or, worse, is it because he's a commie or a socialist? Are Democrats who have the same vision just fear-mongers? Is the U.S. Global Change Research Program, which released the Third National Climate Assessment in May 2014, just a whole lot of hot air?  

Are the Koch brothers really America’s salvation instead of the devil incarnate as they’re painted by filmmakers like Robert Greenwald and journalists who write for the New York Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post?

The debate is useless and in and of itself it’s a clever red herring.  Because nothing gets done so long as we get stuck in the belief that we mustn’t act unless we have 100% consensus of 100% undeniable proof that burning fossil fuels is causing the kind of devastation we can’t roll back and that our children and grandchildren will suffer from exponentially more than we are suffering right now.

  

Some people will never face facts, so that consensus will never happen. Which is exactly what climate change deniers want. Keep ‘em guessing. Anybody who’s taken a walk in Cairo for half an hour on a bad day will tell you what pollution in the air does and looks like. It’s disgusting, it makes you physically sick. If you can’t afford to visit Cairo for the visceral experience, how about a trip to your nearest big city on a bad day when there’s no wind and the air looks brown. Anybody who sits in a locked car with one end of a hosepipe attached to the exhaust, the other end feeding into the car and the engine running – well they can’t tell you anything because they’re dead.  

We shouldn’t need scientists to run tests, because nothing could be clearer than that the products of a lot of what our whole western lifestyle is built on are poisonous and dangerous in the long term – which term is getting shorter by the day. 

But we do need them because so many people don’t want to see what’s in front of their faces, for so many different reasons, just a few of them being that we all hate change; most advocates for tougher environmental laws are Democrats; the current Democrat is an African American; a fortune has been spent on persuading people that they don’t have to worry about climate change.

But probably the biggest problem is that a lot of people’s livelihoods depend on extracting and burning fossil fuels and manufacturing products that operate off them. What work will they do if we all take responsibility and stop dead in our tracks? 

It’s a very real fear and it’s where the climate change deniers get you by the balls. It’s how they get so many to believe them, because they make out that there are only two options in this business of climate change. The one they punt is to keep us dependent on oil, keep drilling, fracking, burning fossil fuels, pouring crap into the air, water and ground so you can have your job and support yourself and your family, and keep the whole economy afloat. Because the way the earth is reacting now is just luck of the draw or the way God planned it anyway; there is no such thing as manmade cause and effect when it comes to climate change.  

The alternative is to believe the fear mongers and clean everything up but be out of a job and have America truly experience another Greater Great Depression. 

But here’s the thing. There’s a third option. If you look at all the wealth of the corporate deniers who, let’s face it, are the movers and shakers and mostly Republican, they could give away two thirds of their wealth and they wouldn’t personally feel it. But not everybody wants to give their wealth away and that’s fine. They could also invest it proactively in creating a totally different kind of industrialization and make the changeover so that nobody lost their jobs and the world got cleaned up. Why don’t they want to do it? Because of who they are. 

They don’t actually care about your job or your lifestyle or your children or what your grandchildren will inherit. They don’t even care what their own grandchildren will inherit. So their argument to people who are afraid of losing their livelihood if the fossil fuel extraction and burning industries are eradicated is bogus.   

According to Forbes in 2013 there were 442 billionaires in the US and in March this year the Los Angeles Times stated that there are now 132,000 millionaires in the US. All these people invest their money somehow. So if they all pooled their resources to invest in green energy and transform the industrial sector, they’d be the ones earning all the millions and billions out of their investments and nothing would really change for them. People now working in the fossil fuel industries would have jobs in clean energy. And we’d have a better world. Why don’t they do it?  

Why not just get on board of climate change regardless of the debate and run with it? It would be so much easier, so much more effective. So much better for all of us. They’d still be billionaires and millionaires and on top of it they’d be world heroes.

Well, a person can dream. It’s never going to happen in that way but change will come about and those wealthy fellows won’t be as ahead of it as they could be. It’s their loss. As for the debate about whether climate change is man-made, thank God there are enough sensible people in the world who want to take responsibility and who understand that they have to act regardless of whether the debate is settled or not for everybody. Thank God they have the courage and willpower to do what needs to be done.

Environment's Knight in Shining Armor Tom Steyer Takes On Climate Change Deniers

As a race we’re slow to face the consequence of our actions, especially our polluting ones, but we’ve also been blind to how much big money was thrown at keeping us stuck in the dinosaur age where environmentalists were laughed at and called whack-jobs and tree-huggers.

Drexel University environmental sociologist Robert J. Brulle, PhD, conducted a study on the climate change countermovement and found that between 2003 and 2010, 91 climate change denial organizations spent over $7 billion on a climate change countermovement. This movement is “a well-funded and organized effort to undermine public faith in climate science and block action by the U.S. government to regulate emissions. [It includes] conservative think tanks, advocacy groups, trade associations and conservative foundations, with strong links to sympathetic media outlets and conservative politicians.”  These 91 organizations currently have an annual income of almost $900 million at their disposal, 75% of which comes from untraceable funding. 

But at last environmental consciousness is main stream and big money is backing it. Environmentalist knight in shining armor Tom Steyer, a retired financier currently worth about $1.5 billion, recently pledged to spend $100 million ($50 million of his own and $50 million which he plans to raise) targeting climate change denier politicians and supporting politicians who actively work towards safeguarding the environment. 

It’s easy, when Wall Street is more like the Wild West than ever before, when crooks get away with destroying economies, and individuals have fortunes that are indecent in a world where so many starve, to assume that all billionaires who have earned their fortunes in the financial world are sons of bitches. Whether Steyer is one of that commendable species or not is hard to say since up until a year ago he stayed under the radar. But in 2010 he (and his wife Katheryn A. Taylor) signed the Giving Pledge to donate the bulk of their wealth to charity which says a whole lot of something good about them both. He’s also an ardent environmentalist and committed to devoting his energy and a lot of his money to the cause, which also says a lot about him. 

These days that means engaging in political campaigning and to that end Steyer founded NextGen Climate in 2013 which acts “politically to avert climate disaster and preserve American prosperity… we are committed to supporting candidates, elected officials and policymakers across the country that will take bold action on climate change—and to exposing those who deny reality and cater to special interests.” 

NextGen Climate is set to be one of the largest outside groups in the US, rivalling in clout the Koch brothers’ conservative political network. But not every liberal body and mind is happy about what Steyer is doing. 

The Guardian ran an article by Andy Koll more or less condemning all super-wealthy individuals who use their fortunes to influence politics regardless of whether they’re conservative or liberal, calling the latter hypocrites. They lament the Citizens United ruling that allows individuals to spend as much as they want in political campaigns but they also say that until things change they’ll play the game. Koll said these liberals are inflicting as much real damage on democracy as conservatives. 

But the reality is that the Koch brothers et al pour millions into influencing politics so environmental laws restricting them won’t be passed. If nobody steps in to counteract the influence that those conservatives’ money buys, who will stop them? 

The voters who have been conned into believing that Democrats just want to take their jobs in the fossil fuel industry away and that burning fossil fuels doesn’t really impact on the environment at all? The conservative Judges and Justices who rule in favor of conservative corporate interest regardless of how their rulings impact on the whole of humanity, not just America? I don’t think so. 

For me the problem isn’t that liberals get involved and competitive in the spending. I think Liberals with a fortune that they’re willing to spend are right to say that until things change they need to play the game as well, otherwise we all lose.

What worries me is that some of these big spenders only want to see their issue resolved and can have tunnel vision. This year Steyer hosted a gathering of liberal donors and environmental philanthropists at his ranch in California as part of his campaign to raise that other $50 million. The New York Times quoted one of the attendees, David Topper, a New York private equity investor as saying “You need to be agnostic as to party. If I find someone who has the right position on climate change, do I care if he owns six guns? Not at all.” So America could possibly end up with a cleaner environment, but everybody could be armed with as many assault weapons as they want.

Women wouldn’t have equal pay, minimum wage would never be raised, gays, lesbians and anybody not white wouldn’t have any rights, deep-rooted racism wouldn’t get addressed, universal health coverage would be done away with and it would be back to the insurance companies scamming everybody…

Even Tom Steyer’s core focus isn’t along party lines, it’s about politicians who advocate working towards climate change. As it happens, so far those politicians are for the most part Democrats, so for now Steyer’s political organization will help prevent the Senate going to the GOP, which will help the threat to America’s democracy on all fronts, not just on that of climate change. But if Republicans get smart and change their tune just about climate change but not about anything else, they could have Steyer’s money as well as the Kochs’. That would truly be the end of democracy in America. And we’d have to kiss goodbye the world as we know it even faster than we’re having to do now.

People with a lot of money might have a lot of money-making sense and they may be passionate about the right things and generous with their money and time, but they don't always have enough sense to see the bigger picture. In the light of the recent California massacre I bet David Topper is wishing he'd kept his mouth shut. Tom Steyer looks far too smart to be blinded by his own agenda - fantastically noble as it is - to how interconnected everything is. He doesn't look like somebody who would promote the environment at the cost of, for example, gun safety, equality and a healthy middle class.

Still I'd feel safer if I knew he was committed to the health of democracy first and climate change second because with Obama as President the second will ensue from the first, but the other way round isn't guaranteed with a Congress in the hands of Republicans.