I posted this video on YouTube this morning. In it I argue that we all know that climate change is now the biggest problem that we as a human race face. And yet you'd never think it from what most political parties are saying at this election. Don't they care about the future, our children and grandchildren and the calamity facing us all? Their indifference is quite staggering.
The transcript is:
This is the last election where we can save the planet, at least as far as the UK is concerned, because let's be clear, we know that we're in a climate crisis now. We have the world's leading climate scientists on the International Climate Change Committee, the ICCC, saying that we are on the brink of a precipice of disaster.
I've known that this was going to happen for years. On the bookshelves behind me are books that I read in the 1970s saying that one day we would reach this position. And now we're here. And yet, apart from the Greens, not a single one of the political parties that is standing for election in 2024 is saying that this is their priority.
It's as if what happens tomorrow is much more important to them than what happens in 20 or more years time when our children, not me - but my children - will still be alive and facing the calamity that might be created if we don't tackle climate change now.
Why are our political parties ignoring this?
Why are they so negligent?
Why aren't they putting the money into the Green New Deal - something that I co-authored in 2008 and which has been noted around the world - which says we need to change the way we manage our economies so that we put the emphasis upon sustainability. The evidence again from those experts, the ICCC and others, is that if only we did this, not only could we hold climate change down to what are still sustainable levels of change, but we could even do so - and even more - increase our prosperity.
Sure, there would be some changes in the way we live, but there have always been changes in the way that we live as an economy, as individuals, as we react to processes of change. And this will just be another of those. But we could have a totally recognisable and sustainable lifestyle if only the investment was made.
So why aren't we getting this process of change?
Well, it's because Rachel Reeves and Jeremy Hunt, and whoever is speaking on the economy for most of the other leading political parties - again, I except the Greens - are saying, “But we can't borrow. We must live within our constraints. There is a limit on what we can do because the City of London won't lend to us.”
This is all nonsense.
There was money to deal with the Covid crisis.
There was money to deal with the 2008 financial crisis.
If there was a war, I guarantee you there would be money available to deal with it.
We face an existential crisis as a human race. Not the planet. The planet will survive whatever we do, but we may not.
And the point is we therefore need to take action and we need to take it now.
But it's not on the agendas of any of our major political parties.
If you share my concern about the future of this planet, the future of young people, and the future well-being of the whole biosphere, then I suggest this is the election where you have to raise that issue with the candidates because they are going to be responsible for delivering your future safety.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
In the 1970s I read the Club of Rome which put the issue on the agenda.
After I finished my OU degree I spent two years in the Ecology party which later became the Greens. I then moved to a party which had more chance of implementing change.
Since then a lot of people have ‘talked the talk’ but real action has been sadly lacking. We have seen more in the last ten years but the problem is accelerating. It is a race for survival and I feel we are falling behind. What makes me angry is that we know what we can do but it is not being done.
Agreed
My feeling too
I think much has been the trivialisation of the impact by economists and political advisors to politicians. The IPCC economics section is typical…. the impact will be 1% of GDP, etc. Steve Keen picks it apart here … 4degrees C increase no problem says economists… scientists say probably extinction of human life :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9knuQHkx9U&t=2680s
Some points from an article written a year ago by Professor Kevin Anderson (Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester):
“The climate has changed – and the rate of change is increasing. It is time to heed scientific evidence rather than casual opinion, hunch, preference or easy political opportunism.
Carbon dioxide emissions are a major cause.
The need to curtail emissions is urgent. The need to cut them is now – not in 2050.
While the poorest suffer – and they do – the average UK energy consumption is extravagant.
For the majority (even in wealthier nations) *I see genuine responses to climate change **improving** not degrading their well-being & quality of life*.”
A few examples
1 An immediate moratorium on airport expansion and a plan to deliver a fair 80 per cent cut in all air travel by 2030.
2 No new internal combustion engine cars would be built from 2025, and there would be a huge shift away from private cars in cities and urban environments coupled with a shift towards public transport and active travel.
3 Maybe rural communities would continue to use EVs, but with a rental rather than ownership model.
4 Retrofit existing homes, not just a pilot scheme, but actually rolling it out street by street at mass scale. Passive house standards would be required.
5 All new properties to have a maximum size threshold. Why are we building homes that are 200 to 400m2? Cut this to a maximum of 100 to 150m2 – still large homes – but with much less resource and material use, and of course less land! And when we sell existing very large houses, have them carefully and creatively divided into normal-sized homes.
All of which would free up labour and resources to achieve the necessary decarbonisation agenda. On top of all of this we need
6 a massive expansion of electrification in the energy system. This is an unprecedented scale and rate of change – pushing the productive capacity of society to its limit and consequently demanding the reallocation of labour and resources to deliver a decarbonised, sustainable and prosperous future.
7 Personal behaviour: Most people over 80 remember the time when transport was on foot, by bicycle, bus or train (and by boat across to the continent.) Few families had cars.
Petrol rationing was introduced in 1939 but from July 1942 until June 1945, the basic ration was suspended completely, with essential-user coupons being issued only to those with official sanction. In June 1945, the basic ration was restored but all petrol rationing did not end until May 1950.
I couldnt believe a jocular item on BBC world service joking about the fact that some snakes might love to migrate as a result of climate change . Not a hint of ‘wouldnt it be better to stop using oil’ rather than adjust to a world where we are dodging poisoness snakes .
Totally against BBC editorial guidelines not to mislead etc etc
Climate obviously not on the election agenda – because to most people its not ‘immediate’ compared to cost of living, NHS etc . The do have farmers saying they can plant no crops this year because of flooding – but don’t draw the conclusion.
I intended to add a reference: https://braveneweurope.com/kevin-anderson-a-habitable-earth-can-no-longer-afford-the-rich-and-that-could-mean-me-and-you
Tory & LINO – identikit political parties………….. in motor vehicle terms they are both SUVs, with the mainstream media their marketing org.
Voters have been groomed (las with SUVs) to believe that they are “safe” – & ignore that they are :
unstable round corners = can’t cope well with economic problems
are very thirsty = neo-liberal
cost more to insure = neo-liberal
bad for the planet = bad for the planet
SUVs………… a metaphore from motoring for the current political situation. (fat & overpriced for a groomed population).
over the weekend indy2024 will be producing several pamphlets on energy & localism.
I thought the same about the election in 2019. Though I was thinking it was more a last chance to have some kind of managed, less painful transition to something closer resembling a sustainable economic system, and therefore an improved chance of avoiding civilisation collapse.
I knew we really couldn’t afford 5 years time wasted on propping up a destructive system that is not fit for purpose. Sadly, the electorate was persuaded that addressing existential threats can wait indefinitely and that spitting in Frenchies eye was clearly of far greater importance.
Like you said, the planet will recover, and arguably many species would be better off if human industrial civilisation was to collapse. Humans less so.
It’s the indifference of so much of the population that still perplexes me, many of whom have children and/or grandchildren
Fiscal rules probably are the reason the so called major parties cannot commit to the major investment needed to finance a just transition. We have already exceeded the 1.5 c limit that was agreed at Paris in 2015 which was essential to save the planet. A lot of waffle and greenwash has gone on since by Tory and Labour. Maybe also the cocooned politicians cannot understand basic science or be bothered with coping with any inconvenience the neccesary measures would entail. Short termism rules
Only the Green Party takes climate seriously and the stronger their showing in the election the more seriously the other parties will change the suicidal course they are embarked upon by never ending economic growth and consuerism. they espouse now=.
Even if for some reason you dont believe in Climate Change or Resource Depletion there are still very strong strategic and economic arguments in favour of renewables and conservation.
But the so called sceptics ignore them as well
The answer could be that all our leading politicians are sociopaths, an argument well-supported by their display of indifference to the ongoing slaughter in Palestine. It could be too that climate change itself is a well-engineered hoax (which they’re in on), the point of which is the reintroduction of feudalism (we walk, they ride). I lean towards the second suggestion myself as even if we ourselves go Net Zero, it by no means means China will do the same or anything like it, making all other efforts futile.
China is moving ahead of the West on green issues
You are right China has been on an rampage adopting renewable. Leaving the west way behind.
A question most pundits fail to answer is are china’s emissions on producing goods the west consumes, Chinese emissions or western emissions? In this game of us and them they are in fact neither. They are our collective emissions but many climate academics like to tow the line that these are “their” emissions. A colonial or us and them outlook only divides us and prevents collective action.
@Bill Kruse – India is a bigger problem than China with respect to climate change based on what I hear via USA serious media (not the Political News Media Industrial Complex)
I now think that true
This is where we probably differ. So 1.5c is almost here if not already here. We’re on the cusp of runaway feedbacks once started we cannot change their course.
The green new deal is a proposed action and I get the argument. But it’s flawed because of its reliance on extraction and mining. Dr Simon Michaux of Geological Survey of Finland provides empirical evidence that we do not have enough minerals to switch to renewables.
The need to reduce energy consumption drastically doesn’t figure anywhere. But that’s one significant part of the solution and no one can talk about it. Because it’s a complete reorganisation of life and society.
The green new deal is a fight to hang onto current energy profligecy. It will lead to resource conflicts.
Others prove otherwise….
That’s spot on. George Carlin saw this coming, and he came to the same conclusion: “There is nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine, the people are f… d.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c&ab_channel=Dadniel
All species eventually go extinct. The much derided lasted around 150m years. The planet will become uninhabitable in around 4bn years. We have been here maybe a couple of million years and will be lucky to last another 40 without serious existential challenges and very lucky to be here in 400 years on our present trajectory.
If we do nothing the planet will continue on its orbit and life will eventually renew once we are gone.
The climate crisis is already with us. 50c heat in the Punjab and all schools closed today. Much of Asia, Africa and latin America 40c or above – impossible to survive for millions unless they have air conditioning. We are heading for over 2c increase in average temperature in the next 5 – 10 years. Average means that areas such as sub-saharan Africa can experience a 7 – 10 degrees increase – total disaster for them. As has been pointed out, scientists have known for decades this crisis was looming but our rulers have ignored them, beguiled by the fossil fuel companies control of governments and media. Party leaders such as Sunak and Starmer are criminally negligent in not putting climate at the top of the policy agenda. People recognise there is a NHS crisis, care crisis, poverty, sewage, you name it, but not the biggest one that threatens the complete destruction of humanity and the natural world as we know it.
In my local constituency the PPC is an arrogant bully, something he conceals under a jocular exterior in public but displays in internal matters. There was a possible alternate, a much better one, but Labour central decided otherwise. I will be voting Green. Activists from here will be canvassing for Corbyn and Feinstein in London. Nobody here talks any sense on the environment or the economy. They are afraid to be associated with pro Palestine sentiment. The storm is here, and moral pygmies will be elected.
This is an article which may offer some insights into why the climate catastrophe we are presently being frogmarched into by our ruling classes is still being denied by too many, especially those in positions of political and corporate influence and power:
https://www.okdoomer.io/all-about-the-dissonance/?ref=ok-doomer-newsletter
Wow, Sara Lanier! What a hugely uncomfortable, yet compelling, read.
Two of my relatives were very friendly. Both very wealthy, I knew they took frequent flights abroad but eventually, in commenting on what I do – with my daily focus on climate change and such – and though I thought I had avoided it, they felt criticised. It may be that I will never recover the closeness that I had.
Your article throws some light on these matters but, oh, how do I hold it all?
The Ipsos voter survey for May 2024 shows the lack of concern amongst the public; with nine other issues higher (including borders and migration at nr.3, unsurprisingly).
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/nhs-economy-inflation-and-immigration-set-to-be-biggest-election-issues
I know
And I find it very worrying