The idea of never ending growth is simply wrong and we must resile from it

The maintenance of exisiting lifestyles and the mitigation of climate change are incompatible.

Modern lifestyles depend upon the profligate use of energy, almost exclusively fossil fuel-based energy, and as is well understood by our climate scientists, the resultant carbon dioxide from the combustion of the ingredients of those ancient fuels has disturbed, and significantly changed, Earth’s climate system.

Humanity has lived through an era of relatively unchanged climatic conditions, but that is changing, or has changed, and so what we are witnessing now is the arrival of weather events foreign to what is needed to allow the people of the world to thrive.

Humanity has been herded into a consumptive col-de-sac, driven there by the market paradigm of never-ending growth that was force-fed to the population using Edward Bernays created propaganda that was re-cast as “public relations”.

The idea of never-ending growth, the essence of capitalism that has now morphed into globilization, is fundamentally flawed and is ultimately impossible in a finite world.

It is the concept to endless growth and the need, now pressingly urgent, to live in a more restrained way which are contradictory and so demand, if we are to have any hope of a reconciliation between the two, we need a re-set of humanity’s values, ideals, aims, hopes, and dreams.

Considering this dilemma causes me to consider what the late German pastor, Dietrich Bonhoeffer said: 

“Culturally it means a return from the newspaper and the radio to the book, from feverish activity to unhurried leisure, from dispersion to concentration, from sensationalism to reflection, from virtuosity to art, from snobbery to modesty, from extravagance to moderation.”

Bonhoeffer, who was killed by the Nazis in 1945 for being involved in an attempt to kill Adolf Hitler, could see even than that our extravagance was detrimental to human wellbeing, although probably for different reasons than those that trouble, and threaten, humanity today.

And so taking Bonhoeffer’s advice, we need to pry apart our extravagance, resile from it and build a new way of living that is about understanding how we can continue to enjoy our lives with less of everything and so live in a more restrained fashion.

Sun Tzu's 6th Century maxim relevant today

Sun Tzu lived in the 6^th century BCE knew nothing of climate change, but had advice pertinent to advocates of action to ease the dilemma.

The Chinese general, military strategist and author of “The Art of War” urged us to “Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.”

Sun Tzu’s maxim crossed my mind as I read The Guardian story “2015: the beginning of the end for climate sceptics”.

John Sauven’s story said we could now be optimistic about the year ahead following an agreement being struck between China and the US on carbon emissions.

“As we head into 2015 things are finally starting to move forward. The contribution made by ongoing advances in solar photovoltaics and other clean technologies, heavily backed by China and Germany, should not be overlooked. At the time of writing, 2014 was the hottest year on record. Though this is of only minor significance to climate science, it provides the right sort of backdrop to give politicians a little extra confidence to act,” Sauven said.

However, with profit still the driver of those behind the business as usual paradigm, the fossil fuel industry will not simply lie down and let this much needed revolution in human behaviour, which will pretty much empty their coffers, roll over them and subsequently remove them from the world’s power structures.

With their undoubted resistance to climate change advocates and what it is they argue for, it is one of those times when we need to keep our enemies close, very close.

We need to understand their motivations, their intentions, their values and what it is that causes them to adhere to ideas that science has shown, repeatedly and unequivocally, to clearly be incorrect.

An error of judgement

Having said all that, I realised, upon reflection, that clearly my judgement had been in error.

To declare anyone an “enemy” is naïve, wrong and short-sighted for it does nought but create a “them and us” situation and when it comes to climate change there is no them and us, rather simply “us”.

Yes, we are all in this together and the sooner we understand and accept that, the sooner we will move toward a position from which we can act in unison to mitigate those aspects of our behaviour that are causing serious disruptions to our climate system.

-      Robert McLean.

 

PM's beliefs, values and position out of step

Tony Abbott’s beliefs, values and position appear vastly out of place in a changing world.

Australia’s PM recently said: “For many decades at least, coal will continue to fuel human progress as an affordable, dependable energy source for wealthy and developing countries alike”.

The quote, lifted from a story on The Conversation headed: “Australia’s coal industry needs to prepare for global climate action” illustrates that Mr Abbott clearly misunderstands global realities that see a major slow-down in the use of coal.

Maybe, however, that “misunderstanding” is not what it seems and is little more than the coalition Government pandering to populist sentiment with re-election being its only aim.

Understanding the ethics of climate change

Our June gathering Beneath the Wisteria will focus on the ethics of climate change.
What, we will consider, are the ethics surrounding a reasoned response to our changing climate; should it be driven by consensus or will the gravity of the situation demand an authoritarian, almost dictatorial response?

Any discussion about ethics can quickly become deeply philosophical and quickly grind to a non-productive outcome and that being the case, BtW supporter, Lou Cook, conscious of the potential difficulty, turned to the internet as a resource.
A Google search by Lou found the following:

Defining Ethics

If we expect to understand ethics, we must know exactly what the word means. Surprisingly, not everyone does. The words ethics, morality, and values are commonly confused with one another, perhaps because of their inherent overlap.

Values:
Our values are the qualities or ideas which each of us cares about and considers important. They can be morally or ethically based, or simply based on natural want or need. They can be good or bad, reasonable or unreasonable. Values are the elements on which we base our actions.

Morality:
Morality is one's individual perception of right and wrong, good and evil. While one's perception of morality does not directly affect others, it does influence the attitudes and values of a society.

Ethics:
The word ethics refers to a set or system of moral ideals. Just as it takes the thoughts and ideas of many people to make up an ideology, ethics are a product of society. Being so, it is not surprising that many ethical issues deal with the relationship between the individual and the group. It is in this area that the most change has occurred in ethics throughout time.

All those who plan to join us on June 30 Beneath the Wisteria in the Maude St Mall at 11:30am, are encouraged to think about values, morality and ethics and as Lou has done, research and hopeful bring an understanding of the term to the gathering.