Now with gasoline at $4.50 a gallon and rising, U.S. citizens are at last recognizing our pressing need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.  But the most commonly named solutions are questionable, for they will incur costs, both economic and environmental.

Energy is required for fertilizer and machinery to grow plants for ethanol–and dozens of countries are already suffering from food shortages as energy needs compete for arable land.  Coal is dangerous to mine and yields greenhouse gases galore.  Hydro-electric plants can store energy well–but how many more rivers can we dam?  Nuclear power is problematic because it will take 15-20 years to make new plants operable, and we still haven’t figured out what to do about the waste–nevermind the potential for new Chenobyls.  Wind and solar power are clean and renewable but dependent upon the vagaries of nature, and the energy is difficult to store.

The most cost effective solution by far is one that most Americans don’t want to hear: conservation.  This solution can be provided at a fraction of the cost of the others.  Conservation would mean driving less, using more fuel-efficient cars, providing more and better mass transit, more energy-efficient homes and offices and manufacturing processes.

When I was studying in Berkeley 20 years ago, a visitor from Kentucky and I passed by a dumpster on which some glaring graffiti read: “Recycle or Die!”  My friend said, “People out here are a little intense, aren’t they?”  The statement is not so radical today–it’s becoming mainstream.  Unless we can grasp the concept that “less is more,” we may find that our very survival will be at stake.   

Most white people I know do not consider themselves to be racist.  That’s an ugly word that brings up images of people yelling the n-word at little black girls trying to desegregate Southern schools, or hooded Ku Klux Klan members burning crosses on lawns. 

But there is something else which divides people more subtly, someting of which most of us middle-class white people are not so aware–and that is privilege.  What do I mean by privilege?  I mean that we take for granted advantages that others do not have and in fact may be far removed from their experience.  We may even assume that we all start out on some kind of equal footing, and that we, in fact, have been successful because of our  splendid judgment and hard work. 

This reminds me of a New Yorker cartoon that I saw years ago.  Two men are talking in a fancy corp office, and the one says to the other, “And what do you owe your success to?”  And the other says, “I’d say being at the right place at the right time–and being born to the right parents and going to the right schools and having plenty of money.”

We assume certain things, don’t we, most of us?  And those assumptions have to do with class, mainly.  We assume that we will never go hungry.  We assume that we will wear shoes that fit–indeed, shoes that are fashionable.  We assume that if we get in a fix financially, someone will be there to help us out. We assume that we will go to college and get some kind of professional job or other at some point. We assume that if we are not served properly in a place of business, it is our right to speak with the manager and ask for redress.  And on and on.  What we may not be aware of is that huge numbers of people–at least 20-25 percent of the population–never make such assumptions.  Would not, could not.

One summer I went to breakfast with my son Madison in our home state of Kentucky–we went to “Cracker Barrel,” where he had waited tables during the summers of his college years.  The waitress asked me, “Would you like orange juice?” and I asked, “Is it fresh squeezed?” She answered, “No,” and I said I would pass.  When she left our table, Madison chided me: “You’re so elitist!” he said.  “Don’t you know what kind of restaurant this is?  This is the people’s restaurant–of course they don’t have fresh squeezed orange juice!  Look at the prices.  All kinds of people come here to eat, but a lot of the food is cheap enough for poor people.  Fresh squeezed orange juice–I’m so embarrassed!”  Well, leave it to your children to keep you humble.

It’s not that privileged people need to feel guilty that we’re privileged–guilt rarely is healthful or productive.  But we do need to be aware.  Everyone does not see the world through our eyes.  Everyone does not go through the world with the assumption that their needs will be met, and that they in fact deserve to have their needs met.  And what I think I need as a middle-class person may be very different from the needs of someone who wonders how she’s going to put food on the table for her children that very evening. 

With increased awareness, we become kinder, more generous, less judgmental: spiritual gifts which come as we open our eyes to the experience of others, and awaken to differences that divide.

The three national television networks have dedicated 181 minutes to weekday coverage of the Iraq war so far this year.  (Source: NY Times 6/23)  The total coverage for 2007 was 1,157 minutes.  What’s the problem? 

Terry McCarthy, a news correspondent from ABC, said that journalists are being frustrated about getting war stories onto newscasts.  The decrease in the relative level of violence “is taking the urgency out” of the coverage, he added.  Lara Logan, chief foreign correspondent for CBS, said on the Daily Show recently that the war seems to hold little interest for many Americans.  Paul Friedman, a senior vice president at CBS, said that coverage of Iraq is extremely expensive, chiefly because of security risks.  Journalists at all three networks expressed fear that their news organizations will withdraw from the Iraq capital after the November election.

The fact is that there is plenty of violence in Iraq, plenty of drama, plenty of interesting footage for cameras (a number of independent films on the war have shown us that)–and I might add, plenty of serious questions for American citizens to consider, including (1) why are we there? (2) when and how should we leave? (3) what’s happening to the billions of U.S.tax dollars flowing in Iraq, and who is being enriched by this wealth? (4) how are the Iraqi people faring, both the ones who are still in the country and the 2,000,000 refugees who have fled? (5) why are we building permanent military bases in Iraq, and how many? (6) how are our Iraq veterans faring, especially those with terrible wounds of body and spirit? (7) how are the bodies of our dead soldiers handled, and why have we not been able to see the caskets and their coming and going? (8) how is the U.S. viewed by the rest of the world, because of our unilateral and illegal attack on Iraq? (9) what infrastructure, both physical and social, in our country has been sadly neglected because of money spent in Iraq? (10) since we’re borrowing heavily in order to finance this war, who is ultimately going to pay for it?  This is not a definitive list, but it’ll do for starters. 

So let me say this to the networks: do you exist only to make money for your stockholders, or do you in fact, because you own the airwaves, have a responsibility to the citizens of this country?  Yes, it’s easy for people to look away.  Who is going to make us see this war and consider its implications, if not you?  Are you willing to do business as usual while our nation loses its integrity and any hope of leadership on the world stage?  Are you comfortable letting the working class families of this country pay the price of failed national policy?

One reason that the Vietnam war was finally brought to a close is that the ugliness of that war was dumped right into our living rooms.  We citizens needs to know the real costs of the Iraq war, because in a democracy, we are ultimately responsible the wars our country wages.  Your part, network companies, is to have the courage to tell it like it is–whether or not everyone likes the story–and that would include your stockholders.