climate change
26 Oct 2009
The Climate Change Slap
Most people are convinced that climate change is happening, but few are prepared to accept that it's our own children who will suffer because of it, finds David Sornig
For weeks my daughter’s class has been rehearsing its lines for a play in which they are performing the ethics of environmentalism.
As far as I can tell (they haven’t performed it yet) the play is replete with all the reassuring slogans we like to hear kids repeating about not polluting the land and oceans, not using too much electricity because of the associated carbon emissions, preserving the forests and not spraying aerosols to save the ozone layer (OK, this last one is a little anachronistic given that CFCs have been phased out, but the spirit is there).
Her teacher tells me that it’s getting to the stage where the kids are forming into a band of environmental activists who are chiding kids from other classes for even daring to pick leaves from trees. While they’re perhaps a little over-enthusiastic (they are six-year-olds after all) most of us would probably agree that these are exactly the kinds of values we should be instilling in them.
Yesterday afternoon a link to Clive Hamilton’s recent lecture "Is It Too Late to Prevent Catastrophic Climate Change?" popped up on my twitter feed. The lecture’s title asks what has pretty much become a rhetorical question of late, and it doesn’t take long for Hamilton to announce that:
"It seems almost certain that, if it has not occurred already, within the next several years enough warming will be locked in to the system to set in train feedback processes that will overwhelm any attempt we make to cut back on our carbon emissions. We will be powerless to stop the jump to a new climate on earth, one much less sympathetic to life."
He goes on to back this up with some pretty solid evidence. And he is not the first to have done so.
This morning at school drop-off a parent turned up with the tree costumes for the play. The appearance of the costumes gave me the chance to open up a discussion with my daughter’s teacher about it. I expressed my admiration for the efforts she was making to bring environmental issues into the consciousness of the kids, and then in a round about way I brought up Hamilton’s conclusions. I wondered out loud what the worth of the "positive" environment message and encouraging kids into activism really might be given the enormity of the catastrophe that is unfolding — and the momentum that it seems to be gathering.
"I worry about the kids," I said. "They are really going to suffer because of climate change."
The teacher responded with an uncomfortable look and said, "It’s not these kids so much, but their kids, who will really have to worry about it."
The evidence suggests to me that this is wrong. I was going to make a point of it, but didn’t because I flinched. What I flinched from was the image of talking about inflicting harm on the children we were in the same room with. Admitting abuse is difficult. Better to imagine the problems of climate change being carried by a generation that does not yet exist.
Christos Tsiolkas, in his highly successful novel The Slap, manages to play out in literal terms one of the big barbecue conversation-stoppers of recent years: the polarised debate about the physical disciplining/abuse of children. The barbecue stopper has become short-hand for the way politics is played out beyond media attention. In many ways it’s the real face of politics.
What the uncomfortable exchange with the teacher made me wonder about was whether or not we are ready to have Hamilton’s imminent climate catastrophe on the barbecue menu.
On Friday, the Greens announced that Hamilton would stand as their candidate for the by-election in Peter Costello’s vacated seat of Higgins. Hamilton is someone the converted will no doubt listen to and vote for when he speaks on climate change. His challenge of course is to get a majority in this largely conservative electorate to listen to him as well. His challenge is to exceed George Monbiot’s definition of politics as "the art of shifting trouble from the living to the unborn". Most people wouldn’t give him much of a chance.
I don’t have much doubt that most people are convinced that climate change is happening, but I wonder whether most are psychologically prepared to accept that it is upon us. I wonder whether we are quite ready for the real barbecue stopper. The Higgins by-election might be the opportunity to put it to the test.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Twitter
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
In all likelihood these kids lives will be shortened by climate change and there won’t be too many of them having kids because by 2030 onwards the world will be facing mass starvation. But hey, it’s better not to think about that. On the other hand Clive Hamilton, while a greenie, is also fairly conservative on lots of issues, he might do much better than anyone expects.
For about six years I have been writing Birthday Letters for my five grandchildren on the subject of what civilization is doing to its life support system. They include the fact that irreversible climate change is under way. But that is only one of the problems that will have to be faced in the near future. They also point out that many of the natural resources our systems use, including oil, are getting scarce. Economic contraction is becoming the dominant feature of our society. Ecological forces are beginning to win the tug-o-war with the economy. It will be a very different world when my grandchildren are in their dotage.
There is a very simple equation that too many older folk are missing here. I am 41 but think like a Y-gen girl, (and never realised why I was different until the rest of the Y-generation started growing up), maybe because my father worked at the University down in Hobart (same place where permaculture was first being thought up), under a professor who, Dad claims, is first to have predicted the Greenhouse effect, through mathematical modelling. So, I grew up with the ideology of it being essential to limit our electricity use. (eg raised to be petrified of letting a door open in a room with a heater on etc)
Can I say that I suffered no harm, but that I have been caused to become far far far more wary about what I might and might not have to undertake in the work place. Where I see the abuse happening, is not from parents, primary school teachers, and high school teachers, but from Universities not yet having caught up, because University education is too far fixated on wanting their graduates to be who gets the jobs, but the jobs, are not conducive to always keeping the door closed in rooms that are temperature controlled by electricity.
The Universities had want to all wake up to the urgent social need that they become less competative, otherwise, soon enough, all the brightest children, will start going to the universities with less well known reputations, but more freedom of thought.
Word Sword Sworn
At Hath
That Hat
Inshallah no poetry farce
By Solomon’s Seal will my past
No word not true can last
I guess that we better just go ahead and say how old the six year olds will be in 2030 and 2050. Today’s six year olds will be making child rearing decisions in 2030 and taking leadership positions by 2050 (if not sooner). It’s worth remembering that today’s younger grandparents grew up with a nuclear treat and a world changed from that of their (our) grandparents. The new threat is different, but more open to local community action.
I am very aware that the youngest need more than green slogans to grow into community based actors. They need experiences of the natural world and habits of care for it, the built environment and other people. Let’s help them see more than individual solutions and so, some hope. Becca
Like David Sornig I read professor Clive Hamilton’s article. I thoroughly agree with David’s comments about the article. David is spot on when he says that, “Few people are prepared to accept that it is our children who will suffer from Climate Change.” I have a friend who constantly sends me warnings about over-use of mobile phones, terrorists and loads of other things. I sent this friend a copy of the Hamilton article. The reply was a breezy dismissal as “all too hard.” I find Kevin Rudd’s remarks on the topic extremely glib too. By the look of things the only people who are seriously doing something about Climate Change at present are the Chinese. They are huge polluters but China is a huge country. Since China is a “Command Economy” and a ‘guided democracy’ the Chinese government is able to take unpopular measures which Western governments can’t - unless all sides of politics agree. If professor Hamilton is correct, and I hope he isn’t but fear he’s right, we also will suffer from Climate Change. People commonly live well into their eighties now, so the teacher David’ mentions, is likely to suffer too. One of the things I particularly dread is the accusatory looks I expect to get from my grandchildren.
There is no doubt that we will suffer climate change. The question is how much.
I suspect that sometimes, when a parent says “I don’t want people telling my children about climate change, I’d prefer them to be blissfully ignorant”, what they really mean is “I don’t want my children telling me about climate change, I’d prefer to be blissfully ignorant”.
Excellent article by David Sornig.
I am a member of the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group (see: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/Home ) , of 300.org (“return atmosphere CO2 to 300 ppm” : http://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/300-org–return-atmosphere-co2-… ) and of the umbrella organization the Climate Emergency Network (see: http://www.climateemergencynetwork.org/ ).
On 350 Day we tramped up and down Swanston Street and St Kilda Road in the heart Melbourne wearing (back and front) big black-on-white signs saying “300 ppm CO2” and delivering the following message (plus “Authorized and printed by by G.M. Polya etc”):
300 ppm CO2
Top climate scientists & UK Royal Society say we must DECREASE atmospheric CO2 concentration from the present 390 ppm to 300-350 ppm ASAP for a safe planet for all peoples & all species.
Unfortunately, world governments and the pro-coal Australian Liberal-National Party Opposition & Labor Government (the Lib-Labs) want to INCREASE CO2 & other greenhouse gas pollution.
Australia is a world leader in per capita GHG pollution (0.3% of world population, its domestic and exported GHG pollution is 3% of world total). The Lib-Labs are betraying our Children & Planet.
300.org for 24 October 350 Day.
End message.
So far this message has reached about 5,000 households in Melbourne … over 21 million to go. However I can tell you it takes 1 person 6 days at 2 hours per day to letter box this message (ignored by the PC racist, genocide-ignoring Mainstream media) to 3,000 homes or about 10,000 people. It would take only about 2,000 decent Aussies at 10 hours per day to do the rest.
We do it for Australia, the Barrier Reef, Humanity, the Biosphere - and for our children and grandchildren.
First World-imposed climate genocide due to unaddressed, man-made climate change is predicted to kill 10 billion non-Europeans this century, this including 6 billion under-5 year old infants, 3 billion Muslims (a Muslim Holocaust 500 times greater than the WW2 Jewish Holocaust or the “forgotten” WW2 Bengali Holocaust), 2 billion Indians, 1.4 billion non-Arab Africans, 0.6 billion Arabs, 0.5 billion Bengalis, 0.3 billion Pakistanis and 0.3 billion Bangladeshis (see ” Save the Planet from climate criminal neocons: make EVERY DAY a 350 Day for air CO2 of 300 ppm -350 ppm”: http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article19304 ).
Decent folk around the world should make EVERY DAY a 350 Day, 365 days every year, until the atmospheric CO2 concentration finally returns to a safe and sustainable level of 300-350 ppm as demanded by the world s’ top climate scientists.
Decent folk around the World must crucially INFORM everyone they can by e-mail, letter and pamphlets that (1) top scientists say that the atmospheric CO2 must be DECREASED from the current 390 ppm to about 300-350 ppm ASAP, (2) world governments are hell-bent on INCREASING CO2 and other greenhouse gas pollution, and that (3) we must act by informing everyone we can and by applying Sanctions and Boycotts against the climate criminal people, politicians (the horrible Lib-Labs in Australia) , corporations and countries betraying our children and the biosphere of our planet.
Peace is the only way but Silence kills and Silence is complicity.
(this comment has been deleted)
Gee that last comment says at all. I’m more worried about arguments and attitudes like yours, Gideon, like than I am about AGW. Who decides who are “decent folk” and what their defining beliefs and characteristics are? Sadly, we are raising a new generation driven by fear, their parents driven by anxiety. Ideologues abound, and fascism is just around the corner. The reality is that we don’t know .. have no idea in fact .. how our children will be affected by climate change. Given that so far reality has fallen far short of the predictions of AGW alarmists, it is quite possible that the effects of climate change may even be positive. How disappointing that would be for so many people .. and how insane that those people seem to actually want the worst! The worried well have found the perfect thing to fear and power-seeking fanatics are exploiting them. And how many of either group can actually honestly say they understand the science ? I endeavour to teach my children to do their own research, think for themselves, make their own conclusions and not be brow-beaten by whatever demagogue or finger-pointer tries to force their world-view on them. Hopefully they will become truly decent folk.
The idea that it’s our children who will really have to confront the problem is depressing yet unavoidable. It’s a theme that Rod Quantock delivered at the 350.org event here in Canberra the other day (there’s a youtube video). Maybe the older generations will continue to write their protest blogs but you can hardly expect the next generation to sit around and talk about it. Our elected political representatives seem incapable of representing the public interest which doesn’t leave us with many options.
David, please tell me how many people believe when you say “Most people are convinced that climate change is happening” round it off to the nearest one hundred thousand, if you like?
(this comment has been deleted because it is off topic)
The story described in the OP is clear indoctrination of children.
“We will be powerless to stop the jump to a new climate on earth, one much less sympathetic to life.”
How strange that someone else has seen the light.
Lets cut the intermediate crap and start preparing and INVESTING in the future and a reality soon upon us.
Hello everyone,
We noticed that this discussion was going off topic, so we have begun to pre-moderate it. Only comments that relate directly to the article will be published. NM
David Sornig has a key conclusion ” I don’t have much doubt that most people are convinced that climate change is happening, but I wonder whether most are psychologically prepared to accept that it is upon us. I wonder whether we are quite ready for the real barbecue stopper. The Higgins by-election might be the opportunity to put it to the test. ”
It HAS been put to the test by Dr Samuel Fankhauser of the LSE, London, UK.
According to IPS (Copenhagen, 26 October 2009: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49010 ), prestigious London School of Economics climate change analyst Dr Samuel Fankhauser told a meeting of 120 pro-environment legislators from the eight most industrialised countries and emerging economies that a future global climate change treaty must limit the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million (ppm). Unfortunately all but 2 (TWO) felt the goal was not feasible.
IPS report: ” Faced with Fankhauser’s proposal, the chair of the GLOBE forum, British MP Barry Gardiner, asked the 120 legislators present whether they believed limiting CO2 concentration to 350 ppm by 2050 was practicable.
Only two legislators said yes. Reacting to such a display of pessimism, Gardiner told the meeting: “We should be terrified.”
“If you of all people do not believe that an ambitious goal is realistic, then we are lost,” he said. ”
If a properly informed Australia does not discard the climate criminal Lib-Labs then, as Barry Gardiner MP said, “We should be terrified”.
It is the job of ALL decent folk who care about our kids, our country and the biosphere to ensure that ALL the people of Australia are properly informed - thus New Matilda does an excellent job.
If you Google the phrase “350 Day” on page 1 of 290,000 results you will find a for a succinct, referenced statement of concern by me about the acute seriousness of the climate emergency see “24 October UN Day & 350 Day – Science says reduce CO2 to ~300 ppm “: http://www.safeclimate.org.au/node/188 .
Tell everyone you can - and especially at the moment the good folk of Higgins.
Peace is the only way but Silence kills and Silence is complicity.