The short story “The Weatherman”, caused me to think of the blog we read about climate change ethics. One specific question from the blog that related really well to “The Weatherman” was the question that asked, “Does the adaptation effort privilege the wealthy and powerful, at unjustified cost to the poor and dispossessed?” (Moore 4). This question completely applies to “The Weatherman” because the only people who benefit from the weather being controlled are the Green people. However, the sandtowners do not receive the same benefits from the weather being controlled as the Green people do.
In the story Marly claims, “You should’ve seen them! They were filthy, starving. Half dead. And here we are, us fat Green people, getting everything we want and destroying everyone else” (Howitt 136). This statement relates completely to Moore’s third question on her blog post because the weather being controlled by the Green people is only privileging the Green people, while causing the sandtowners harm. Some of the Green people, like the couple in the story, feel bad for the sandtowners because they know that what they are doing is wrong, but they also know that in order to survive they have to control the weather.
In the blog, the author makes a comment about when people say, “We will adapt”, are they referring to other people suffering in the other areas or are they just thinking of themselves and the society they live in? In “The Weatherman”, the majority of the Green people were only thinking of themselves when controlling the weather. This example makes me think of other examples that we have talked about in class such as the Alberta tar sands or the Keystone XL pipeline. The people involved with those issues are only thinking of themselves rather than how those issues will affect our planet negatively in the long run.
When the protagonist learns how to make his first storm, he tells Kish how he knows that they only make storms because they have to. Kish replies with, “We make storms to make sure the sandtowns remain that way. We can only feed so many mouths” (Howlitt 143). It just upsets me that they know they are killing people because of what they are doing and yet they keep doing it. But sadly, people will do whatever they have to do in order to survive in this world and keep their own families alive rather than putting other people’s lives before their own.
Therefore, reading “The Weatherman” along with reading the blog post about climate change ethics just made me realize how selfish the Green people were, which then made me think of how people are in our society especially when it comes to survival. It’s scary. A lot of the decisions that have affected our planet and have caused climate change are because of survival. People need money in order to survive. So of course they are going to continue to work for these oil companies and other companies that are causing more problems for our planet because that is how they are making money to provide for their families. Although, survival is crucial, we need to start thinking more about the ethics of the decisions we are making that are affecting our planet as well as the people living on this planet. Otherwise, we will only continue to ruin our planet and the lives of others.
Howitt, Holly. The Weatherman. 7 March 2012. Print.
Moore, Kathleen. “Ethics of Adaptation to Global Warming.” What does Earth ask of us?. Center for Humans and Nature. Web. 29 January 2015.
I completely agree with the point you are making and felt the same way toward the statements that you stated. It makes me wonder as to how the third-world countries will be affected and how much more worse could they possibly be due to the climate change. Also, what about the lower-class in the US? Would extra measures be taken to help the people who need the help in our own backyard?
I believe that you are correct in that we need to work towards making a better future for the next generation. However, I somewhat disagree with the argument that I believe you were making about how selfish the Green people were.
As you said, one of the questions asked by Moore in her blog asked, “Does the adaptation effort privilege the wealthy and powerful, at UNJUSTIFIED cost to the poor and dispossessed?” I capitalized the word “unjustified” because I believe that is the main question here; were the actions of the Green people justified?
You kept stating the idea of people keeping there own families secure at the expense of other families’ well-being. One; in most situations, people do put their own families above others because that’s how families work. The people of the family take care and support each other, especially in hard times.
Two; let’s step away from individual families and instead look at the society in the story as a whole. The people are in a situation where there is just a limited amount of resources to moderate and distribute to a large group of people. They needed a way to regulate all of the resources so that the society could survive. Perhaps the society could have come up with a better solution in order to allocate and govern everything, but the system the society had did keep everything stable, even if some people suffered because of it.
In conclusion, I agree that our current society needs to come to its senses and actually work to preserve our environment. However, I would not call the Green people selfish. They were doing what they believed to be necessary for humanity to live. In fact, if anyone was selfish in the story, it was the narrator. He needed to understand what his actions would cause for everyone else. The phrase “look before you leap” comes to mind.
I agree that it is a tough situation and a tough ethical decision to make. The green people should not be hurting the sand people but they also want to survive themselves. Hopefully our world does not get to the point of making decisions like these.
I also found that connection between The Weatherman and Moore’s question very strong regarding the privilege that the wealthy and powerful receive (Green people), at unjustified cost to the poor and dispossessed (Sandtowners). It brings up many moral questions, for instance, is it worth it to take measures with climate change that may hurt some of the lower class if it means saving much of the upper class?
The issue presented in “The Weatherman” is deeply thought provoking. I would normally agree with the greater good situation, but the Green People seem to be enjoying much higher standards of living than the sand people. If the Green People were barely surviving, than I could see the need for saving resources so that humanity could survive, but the story appears to make it seem like the Green People are living in luxury at the expense of the sand people. The third world countries would be much more affected by climate change, which could lead to the possibility of having a similar situation in the real world in the future.