Global Warming and the Future
Eric write, It seems so strange/absurd, though, that most Newstrolls
regulars never could "get it" despite all the evidence of the global
warming urgency posted here over the years. (And still don't get it,
now.) Then again, maybe it was too late ten years ago, and we just
didn't realize it. All this debate and bickering over the years about
global warming may have all been for naught.
Well with those sentences you have just moved light-years.
I don't think it's the case that none of us 'get it'. I think we all
get it, all except the lunatic anymice dissenters.
Where does that leave us?
First, we have some time. Even a dramatic climate change is going to
take a lifetime. What we're trying to plan for is for our descendents,
not ourselves. Sure, there will be disruptions in our lifetimes, but
certainly no more dramatic than in the last century. Which beings us
to...
Second, there will be casualties. Most likely they won't be us;
casualties will be for the most part the poor and for the most part in
the developing world. We can't change that, we can, at best, mitigate
the suffering and plan to make our own actions less destructive than
those of our predecessors, the harvest of which we are reaping in
these unavoidable deaths today. But we have, at least, some room. And
it gives us some directionality toward our efforts. Specifically...
Third, people who are well educated and living in a reasonably stable
society should be able to survive. The big danger in changing
conditions is ignorance; the second big danger is civil strife. People
can live on a lot less, and in much worse conditions, than we
currently do, and given the chance, most people will survive climate
change. That said...
Fourth, a lot of the ecosystem won't. We are already in a situation
where fish stocks have been depleted, forests are denuded,
desertification is rampant. The world will survive - it has survived
mass extinctions on numerous occasions before. The loss of species is,
at heart, a human problem - not because we're all touchy feely, but
because we need those species to survive. We will have to develop
alternatives and it's going to be a biotechnical race, but again, we
have time, if we keep our act together.
These are hard realities. But they point to a strategy...
First, don't panic. It's a serious situation, but we can deal with it.
We have a lot more to fear from each other than we do from climate
change. Cooler heads, not the panic-stricken, will prevail.
Second, the developing world must stand on its own. For us, living in
western democracies, that means easing and eliminating our dependence
on these countries. The exploitation has to end - the cheap imports
and low-cost labour will end either way, and we stand a better chance
of survival as a planet if these nations help themselves rather than
imploding.
Third, help people help themselves. Don't save people, empower them.
Educated people will for the most part work together because they know
their odds of survival and a decent life are improved. People who live
in open, democratic, and supportive societies will succeed, and so
empowered, people will tend to choose this form of organization.
People who live in dictatorships will die in increasing numbers as
things get worse. The more people we can empower, the more people we
can save. It's that simple.
Fourth, we press ahead with research and development across the board
- our very existence will depend on it. There will be some things we
cannot solve - maybe a strain of avian flu, maybe key shortage - but
for each problem we solve, more people will be saved. Things like
space exploration, biosphere, cloning, artifical intelligence, etc.,
are not long-shots. They are best bets.
What does that mean for each of us as individuals?
First, don't jump to easy solutions, don't focus on blame and
scapegoating, don't zone out and join a cult - don't lose your head,
in other words. People who do not treat this as a complex long-term
problem endanger not only themselves but also the others they come
into contact with. It is one thing to oppose people who are making
this worse - make make no bones about it, the rational will begin to
push back against the superstitious and irrational with increasing
force as the stakes get higher. It's quite another to be the one whose
mad throes are threatening to sink the whole boat.
Second, learn to live with less. People who can live with less can not
only better survive hardship, they are also more independent and able
to resist threats and actions by the lass stable elements of society.
If you find yourself voting or acting in such a way as to defend your
possessions, merely for the sake of having possessions, you are being
manipulated into the danger zone. Living with less also, collectively,
puts less strain on our carrying capacity, which will be seriously
stretched in the years to come.
Third, get smarter. Not simply smarter in the sense that you know more
things (though it never hurts to hone a craft or a skill) but in the
sense that you can understand and read the signs better. People who
ran inland when the sea receeded survived the Tsunami; people who
evacuated New Orleans ahead of Katrina lived (and people who had
evacuation and accomodation planned ahead of time avoided the worst of
it).
Fourth, when it comes to knowledge and research, take the gloves off
and get to work. This means not only doing the front-line development,
but in doing everything that can be done to foster greater social
knowledge, including open content and open source, the free flow of
ideas, civil liberties, and more. Focus your efforts on building an
adaptive, learning and knowing society, and don't be distracted by
mere short-term (and often exploitive) economic gain.
OK, this isn't everything. But it's a plan. A starting point. And in
my view, even if some of the details are wrong, something like this is
our best - and possibly our only - means of survival.
Posted by Downes at 6:18 PM 2 comments Links to this post
Standing Alone
I find myself standing alone a lot, lost in my own thoughts, and it
from time to time crosses my mind: what do great thinkers think about
when they stand alone?
Ludwig Wittgenstein, for example: a former prisoner of war, master
logician and theorist of language (whose mere thoughts would likely
have been themselves a masterpiece, were they to be captured and
printed), possibly gay (and who would have witnessed the destruction
of colleague Alan Turing from close range). What would go through his
mind? When he stood alone and looked at a tree or a squirrel or the
rowers on the canal, what questions would go through his mind?
Or in a similar vein, Albert Einstein, famous for his 'though
experiments' regarding the nature of the speed of light - these most
probably would have occupied him as we waited for the bus or taxi, or
stood in line at the bank. While the rest of us think about what we're
having for supper or whether the books will balance at the end of the
week, what would einstein be thinking about?
Do they ponder their place in history? Run through mathematical
equations? Write their forthcoming texts in their head? Or do they
empty themselves of thought, achieving peace through satori? When
Bertrand Russell went to the bathroom (presumably alone) did he review
in his mind the great discussions of the past, did he ponder his next
move in the interminable discussion with Whitehead?
Here's what I think: that they thought of all these things, and more,
their personal thoughts a vivid mosaic of abstract expressionism,
formulae and calculations, internal dialogues, topics randing from the
abstruse to the mundane. That they were, first and foremost, human
beings, and when alone with their thoughts must need have dealt with
their very human condition.
And that there is a time when such minds, when they stand alone, speak
to and are accountable only to themselves, when they think about what
is good, and right, and important.
This I think accounts for the fact that the vast majority of these
great thinkers - all of them, I think - eventually evolved into what
is oft-times thought of as a 'radical' philosophy. Because when a
great mind turns only to itself for counsel, certain things emerge as
self-evident: the need for peace in the world, the imperative to
reduce suffering, the fundamental humanity of all who walk this
planet, the sameness that defines each of us, from the greatest
thinker to the tiniest baby. Great thinkers understand best and most
of all, I think, how little they differ from those assigned a more
mundane place in history, and would be accutely aware of the accident
and happenstance that put themselves in a position to be, in fact,
great thinkers.
It is when you think that you are (or should be) special or privileged
that you are willing to tolerate the inequities and inhumanities
necessary to place you in such a position; but when you are special or
privileged, through your own merit and through the twists and turns of
history, you understand that the inequalities and inhumanities that
create such privilege are intolerable.
Because, when you have only yourself to account for, when you see only
yourself in the mirror, then awareness or tolerance of inequities or
inhumanities cut like a knife. They diminish you, devalue everything
you believe and have worked for, make you less of a person.
Standing alone, the only merit stems what what you've become, and none
No comments:
Post a Comment