Americans living in Washington D.C. protested against the climate policies introduced by the state government. Washington’s policy aimed to monitor how the individuals residing therein generate electricity, what food they eat, and the kind of cars they drive. According to Balthazar (2013), although this approach would help curb the adversities associated with carbon monoxide emission, economists and residents questioned its sustainability and benefits to the Americans. However, there exist some alternative community services that would reduce sudden climate change costs without exposing the Americans to economic constraints.
Specifically, about 100 residents of the elderly and young people around the capital demanded action on climate change through marches and rallies to bring pressure on politicians. Fourteen environmental and social justice activists joined the locals on Washington’s streets to express their dissatisfaction with the environment-related policy. The unlicensed activists that took part in the protest disturbed traffic around the White House, Capitol, the National Mall, and other social facilities. By 8.00 a.m., at a busy crossroads at K Street, capital of corporate lobbying, the demonstrators parked a shiny, pink, and yellow sailboat.
During this time, the police were blazing sirens as protesters were drumming and dancing on the sidewalks. During the demonstration, the entrusted law enforcement agents based in Capitol Hill arrested six of those who were carrying weapons and blocked the westbound traffic outside the Health and Human Services Building, while about 30 dissenters chanted.
Even though the police officials arrested the protestors to discourage them, their main aim was to disregard the clean gas bill introduced by Jay Inslee’s administration to curb the increasing emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Although the residents of the capital agreed that the state rule’s decision influenced them positively, the government overlooked the guidelines’ economic implication on the inhabitants (Uppal, 2021).
The activists added that the populace might not see the significance of the altered climate, but it will cost Americans tremendous expenses. As discussed by Balthazar (2013), climate change is happening, and human intervention is certainly important, but the significant governments’ climate policy exposes the public to financial burdens. Specifically, climate change regulation aims to increase energy prices, thereby reducing energy use by families and companies.
Similarly, the participants chanted that heavier controls on climate change had increased power charges and pump prices. Families are affected repeatedly, paying more for energy and food, clothing, and healthcare because they are necessary at all stages of life, processing, manufacturing, and transporting products to customers. These growing costs undermined the region’s economic development, a crucial factor in sustaining a healthier climate. When the economy in a country rises, the financial capacity of its people also increases, improving their ability to protect the environment (Balthazar, 2013). Thus, the campaigners used their political rights to discredit the controversial bill, arguing that the decree will weaken the Americans’ livelihoods and their ability to protect their environment.
Instead, the protestors argued that the government should sustain a strong economy by reducing tax and removing supervisory obstacles to energy innovation. For instance, some states obtain safe and natural gas, but the building of pipelines to export natural gas to other parts of the state is hindered by unnecessary legislation and disputes. Competitive power markets will also encourage customers to purchase 100% renewable energy if they wish.
The establishment of a broken regulatory framework would allow new advanced commercial nuclear technologies to emerge. Therefore, society can be guaranteed affordable, safe, and reliable electricity, making them lead quality lifestyles. Many countries consider this approach to sustain a rising economy. Moreover, Balthazar (2013) added that the traditional narrative issues go deeper than what authors publish in their various publications. According to Balthazar (2013), the 1960s had seen many significant environmental concerns. Therefore, it is unfair to say that everything worsened before the federal government was involved.
However, alternative community services could reduce the negative consequences associated with the emission of deadly greenhouse gases. Schools and other social institutions such as religious centers and economic organizations need to enlighten the public about the adversities related to climate change. Local authorities use different educational strategies to help people understand the consequences of climate change and why greenhouse gas emissions are essential to minimize. The innovations provide ideas and resources, thus enabling residents to modify their conduct so that the emissions of greenhouse gasses can be minimized (Uppal, 2021).
Consequently, enlightened locals’ efforts to promote renewable energy drive fuel-efficient vehicles and the decision to invest in energy-efficient appliances are some of the approaches that could help boost the region’s environment and economic sustainability.
In conclusion, the protest by the locals within Washington supported Machiavelli’s ideas that for people to follow someone, they have to trust them first. However, these individuals use maltreatment as a way of persuasion. The regional government enacted the controversial bill overlooking the economic influence it would have on their subjects. At least at their extremes, states with strong economies embrace relatively strong initiatives to protect the environment, while those with bad economies also encourage weaker initiatives. Thus, both the state government’s and the protestors’ interests in the environment-related policies supported Machiavelli’s ideas.
References
Balthazar, N. (2013). The Capitol Hill Playbook: A Machiavellian guide for young political professionals (1st ed.). Skyhorse.
Uppal, N. (2021). How Machiavellianism engenders impression management motives: The role of social astuteness and networking ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110314. Web.