What now, after two scorching weeks that have set the nation ablaze and delivered warnings of catastrophe so regular they have begun to seem monotonous? Could it be a turning point in Australia’s political logic on climate change; the episode that turned climate denialism (or at least agnosticism) from a political asset into a liability? The moment when those debates about the cost of action seemed rather less urgent in the searing face of the cost of inaction?
| Recent fires have increased public recognition of the gravity of climate change. |
That people are now prepared to talk climate change in the midst of a fire emergency tells you that some kind of threshold has been reached. At least something is up when politicians – from both major parties – spend considerable energy telling you not to discuss something, and the public debate carries on anyway. At that point, such pleas sound more like desperation than authority.
But there’s a long way to go here, because the problem in Australia is that climate politics is no longer a simple contest between believers and deniers. It’s not even a contest between those who want action and those who don’t. Perhaps the greatest trick of all this has been pulled by those who support the idea of climate action but oppose every particular version of it.
Read the story from The Age by Waleed Aly - “We say we want climate action, but we still won't vote for it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment