Bridge coverage suggests to this reader that Hanscom opposition relies on class envy, climate bullying, and a faux reverence for history, but not a sound analysis of its mostly positive impacts. This is elitist Net Zero climate fascism (power is Power!) in action.
After the blithe removal of tercentenary markers and the cancellation of Dr. John Cuming, we now learn racist Concord’s history has its uses after all. It protects privilege.
It is not an argument against Hanscom to cite lifestyles (only the hyper-wealthy fly private jets). If it were, why does exclusive Concord have single-family zoning? Or is the “punish the rich” moral aesthetic so arbitrary that it really means “punish the richer”?
Further, it is also unreasonable to believe that CO2, a trace gas (0.04%), has greater impact than geologic and cosmologic forces (see Dagsvik, Moen Sep 2023 Statistics Norway; no carbon climate model predicts any current or historical data set). And, even if it does, Hanscom’s impact is negligible vs. the accelerating development of coal plants in China (two per week just this year, says NPR) and India (four times its five-year average planned for 2024, says Reuters). What moves the leaderships of these nations, but eludes the Hanscom opposition? Maybe they put people before privilege?
Hanscom expansion will provide jobs in construction, maintenance and operations. Easier jet access will improve the region’s attractiveness to investors. Investment creates jobs. As we welcome newcomers to Massachusetts, do we not have a responsibility to grow jobs? Do our new friends not have a right to participate with us in the American dream? Hanscom will help. (So would a Walmart and Market Basket at the prison.)
An honest, valid concern is noise. But (note to DEI Commission) perhaps Concord should bear that cost willingly to foster diversity.
Mark Dobbins
Elsinore Street