Windy. Snow showers this morning. Then a scattered thunderstorm or two for the afternoon. High 42F. Winds WSW at 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 60%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph..
Tonight
Some clouds. Low 29F. Winds WSW at 15 to 25 mph. Higher wind gusts possible.
I greatly appreciate Ryan Urie’s editorials, but I was hoping he would take a different approach in his Feb. 17 piece about “wokeness.” He lays out several truths about problems with the way the definition of woke has manifested itself in our society, and I totally agree that it “is not the principles but the tactics” of applying the term that are what are causing so much harm and misunderstanding among people.
The definition of the term woke has been, like many other terms, twisted and denigrated by those who misuse it for the purpose of tearing people down in one way or another. Too often, political parties play this game of defining terms their own way and end up controlling the narrative. We all need to recognize this tactic, call it out, and overcome it every time it happens. I am calling it out now.
Why would anyone think that being woke is bad? The opposite of woke is asleep. Do those who believe woke is bad, really believe it is better to be asleep?
Here’s my definition of woke: aware, fully conscious, empathetic, recognizing everyone’s uniqueness. How could anyone argue that those qualities in a person are bad? Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum go way too far to distort this definition and use it to criticize the other side.
It’s time for us all to come together and not continue to rip each other apart, especially over a single word that describes how we all should live.
Kathy Dawes
Moscow
The need for climate action
Many of us remember worries in the 1980s about a hole in the ozone layer and concerns about its causing skin cancer and damaging crops. In response, the 1987 Montreal Protocol was signed. This resulted in a global phasing-out of the ozone-depleting substances, or ODSs.
The latest (2018) study reported, “actions taken under the Montreal Protocol have led to decreases in the atmospheric abundance of controlled ODSs and the start of the recovery of stratospheric ozone.”
This is a very short, simplified summary of how an international agreement on the need for action, the subsequent efforts, and the result 35 years later is solving a problem. This handling of a pressing environmental issue can be reproduced today with global warming. Yes, global warming can be brought under control. Most countries have already agreed that it requires action to do so. We need to make sure that governments on all levels — local, state and national — follow through. Contact your legislative representatives. Share facts like these and let your representatives know they need to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Only then can we look to a future in which we live in a recognizable world.
