\ ; $68 change in environmental understanding Science ‘Matters David Suzuki, David Suzuki Foundation The New Year is often considered a time to reflect on the past and look ahead to see what’s coming in the near future. Over the holidays, I had time to reflect on some recent events and I think what’s coming next may be “good for the environment.” Why the quotation marks? Well, early in December, I spent a week in Montreal for the international climate negotiations. It was an amazing experience and I was fortu- nate enough to be able to speak with a wide variety of people, from delegates and dignitaries, to business leaders and citizens on the streets. It was a busy time. There were peaceful protests and — rallies. There were tough discussions behind closed doors. There were holdouts and those who attempted to derail negotiations. There were even a few confused souls stand- ing out on street corners, handing out pamphlets insisting that global warming was some sort of hoax. Yes, the con- ference had a little of everything. But I also experienced something I didn’t expect—a sense of common purpose, a recognition of just how seri- ous climate change really is. And the beginnings of a recognition that it’s not really an environmental problem at all. That certainly wasn’t the case in 1997 at the negotia- tions for the Kyoto Protocol. While delegates from most countries at that conference went to Kyoto to look for ways to solve the growing international problem of global warming, Canada, the US, and a few others went in with the attitude that it was all a trade negotiation—as though the point was to haggle for the lowest possible commit- ment and the largest number of loopholes. The 2005 conference in Montreal was very different. Yes, there were still those seeking the best deals, and some countries tried to prevent progress, but this time Canada played an important role. And rather than hinder progress, many industry groups sought to bring people together and get a strong commitment from our political leaders. Consider this: in Montreal, we actually had some of the world’s largest corporations attending and asking govern- ments to set targets and timelines to help them reduce cli- mate pollution. Suddenly this little “environmental” prob- lem was on their radar screens as a priority—and an opinionsubmit@hotmail.com opportunity. Does this mean that we have turned the cor- net to a new global consciousness? Or that in 2006 we will finally see an energy revolution away from fossil fuels towards sustainable energy sources? For now, that’s just wishful thinking. Such a transition will take a long time indeed. Together, the people of our little planet consume tens of thousands of litres of oil every second. It simply boggles the mind to think about how thoroughly embedded we are in a fossil-fuel culture. But fossil fuels aren’t our only sources of energy, and ener- gy, not necessarily oil, is what our economy needs. So our oil-dependent culture will be around for a while, but the change we are seeing in worldview right now is vital if we are to adequately address global environmental challenges. What we are finally seeing is the recognition that environmental problems are not things that occur out there, in the environment. The environment is not a place we go for boating in the summer and for skiing in the win- ter. The environment is our home and we are a part of it. That means environmental problems are social and eco- nomic problems too. Tt also means climate change is not an environmental problem. It’s a human problem, and one that will affect all facets of our lives. Given this reality, the old liné of doing something because “it’s good for the environment” seems almost quaint and outdated. Solving global environmental challenges isn’t good for the environment; it’s good for us. B Sides: Why Tickle Me Emo's Just Another Fad Brandon Ferguson, Opinions Editor Having spent my New Year's festivus with a number of cool kids who, by a misfortune beyond their control, are very much Emo kids, I couldn't help but revisit King Emo Kevin Lalonde’s piece from last semester. In it, he offered a humourous piece of emotheraphy for those who don't quite care for soft and whiny “why me” music. Here ate some hard rock thoughts on the matter. While reading Lalonde's poignantly pedantic piece on why Emo music rules and Top-40’s for fools, I couldn't help but feel this welling rage towards, and an overwhelm- ing sadness for, the Emo boys and girls out there. Actually, scratch the Emo girls—they're funky and fine-and wear neat accessories. But the Emo boys, oh boy, are you buttheads boobs of the most banal breed. Here's my gripe with you: you're so subversively anti- pop and so overtly off the map that you fickle fucks don't even realize you're bigger consumerism whores than any Top-40 lap dog out there. When I measure consumer whoredom, it's always in relation to the want/need ratio—how much you want that purse versus how much you need that Prada purse. Now, from what I've gleaned from the Emo boys I know and love—and let it be known that I'm infatuated with Lalonde and am reserving my last ever gay experience for the boy with the blonde bramble bush locks—the Emo experience is supposed to be all about the old axiom of “if it feels good, do it,” even if lacking in general consensus or dread- ed popularity. However, as soon as an Emo band makes it big they become somehow depreciated. It's only a matter of min- utes before Death Cab for Cutie becomes an albatross of bad taste (even if their new album P/ans is brilliantly deca- dent—not as much as Transatlanticism, of course, but Beethoven could rise from the dead tomorrow and never pen a better album than DCC's 2003 effort). Which is bull- shit. It's anti-Emo. It's rebelling because it becomes popu- lar, and therefore, somehow distasteful, even if it feels good listening to. No wonder we're all a bunch of punk students mired in debt and wallowing in apathy. If an anti- establishment movement ever gained ground it'd become popular and promptly fall on its face...because being pop- ular is bad. Please, Emo geeks; please crawl out of the lockers the jocks stuffed you in and reclaim your will to do what you want, not what all the other individual clones are doing, And if you needed further proof that Emo kids are nothing more than plagiarized Pop-40 pukes, which you probably do because my case thus far is Scott Weiland-thin, then look to the creepy lameness with which these Emoks chronologically list how great their bands are. You can lis- ten to Sufjan Stevens! “breathtaking musical endeavour of the year” or “the heroes of last year, The Walkmen.” Do you know who you sound like, oh Emo-Wan Kenobi? You sound like freaking Joan Rivers or Jo-Jo gabbing about Ashley Judd's red carpet disaster, you menstrual mental midgets. I've been bloody fortunate to have some non-snotty Tickle Me Emo buds open my eyes to some great bands: The Decemberists, DCC, Interpol, Wolf Parade, Earlimart, Okkervil River, etc. But there are other Emo squits out there probably snickering because Interpol isn't a quote- unquote Emo band. Well, shit stain, calm yourself before your mother's milk comes shooting out your nose—and thanks for proving my point, dork. Perhaps my biggest beef with Emo kids is when they support a band that they should've known would suck if given a spotlight. Franz Ferdinand comes to mind. While championing this boy band meets Duran Duran musical miscarriage, didn't any one of you pricks ever notice that they fucking blow? No. They were a well coor- dinated, funky fresh twist on rock n’ roll's je ne sais quoi blah blah blah. Don't listen to Puddle Theory of a NickleFault because their lyrics are sooo rudimentary and unrefined? What part of repeating “Do you want to” a hundred times to a Special Olympian's drum beat as four nerds crash through an art gallery in matching Thriller out- fits, deeply upsetting metaphors of social elitism and high brow art alike, comes across as especially gifted? Nothing? Oh right; Franz Ferdinand is popular now so you've disowned them. At least Nickleback proved that they could string more than four words together while making it big on the back of two guitar lessons. Count in time with me: This...is... how...you...remind...me. See? Six words. That makes continued on pg 9