Monday, December 5, 2016

Why the climate crisis is different from any previous political crisis

Interesting article "The Soviet Union collapsed overnight. Don’t assume western democracy will last for ever" by Paul Mason in the Guardian. Mason argues that we should not assume democracy will simply last. Things can change very quickly - he points to the collapse of Soviet Union and now the election of Trump in the US (and I would add, the NZ PM John Key stood down yesterday). But Mason points to the hope that comes from the fact that Russian activists have seen seemingly eternal regimes fall within days and therefore "possess a diamond-hard belief in change."
By contrast, climate change looks a lot harder if we reach a point where things run away on us. Nature will be that seemingly 'eternal regime' and while we have a lot of science that suggests that things can go bad very quickly, we dont have much evidence that they can be reversed with equal and unexpected rapidity. Imagine how dispiriting that will be. It will be new territory for humanity. Who knows what governance and society will look under that burden. What story do you give to people about their future? What do you teach to children? Hence the need to take very bold steps now.
Otherwise an ordinary day here, lots of media about arctic ice levels being astonishing low for winter, and big cracks in the Antarctic ice sheets, but alarm is mostly limited to the usual circles of scientists and liberal/environmental media. The crisis is absolutely staring us in the face. Lots is being done, and in the background a sweeping transformation of energy production and consumption is well underway, but still, by any metric, to little, too late. We wait for the really bold interventions that shout 'wake up' to everyone. And everyone here prepares for their flying Xmas holidays

No comments:

Post a Comment