Collier on plunder and romanticism

Plunder and romanticism are so rife precisely because ordinary citizens are insufficiently informed about the opportunities and threats that nature poses to have forced governments into effective regulation. In the task of building an informed citizenry the starting point is an ethics of nature that people in societies with widely different value systems can understand and accept. Neither the romantic variant of environmentalism that sees nature as an end in itself, nor the austere universalism of economic Utilitarianism, can provide such a foundation. The most difficult wars to win are those that must be fought on two fronts. It is more straightforward, psychologically more satisfying and dramatic to have only a single enemy. The romantics among environmentalists and the Utilitarian Platonic Guardians among economists see nature as a single-front war. The romantics regard economic growth as the enemy; the Platonic Guardians regard the values of ordinary citizens as the enemy. But most struggles in development are not like that: sanity lies in the middle rather than at the extremes. Aid provides an example. It is neither a panacea nor a menace.

Collier, Paul. The Plundered Planet: Why We Must – and How We Can – Manage Nature for Global Prosperity. 2010. p. 12 (paperback)

The G7 on getting beyond fossil fuels

Regardless of whether you think the commitment is credible, a position on climate change adopted by the G7 bears consideration:

“At yesterday’s summit in Bavaria, the G7 leading industrial nations agreed to phase out fossil fuels by the end of the century.”

For one thing, it’s questionable when politicians set goals so far off in the future. For another, we need to phase out fossil fuels much more rapidly if we’re to avoid catastrophic climate change. Nonetheless, there’s one important message here: fossil fuels have no long-term future, and that is increasingly being recognized by the world’s most powerful governments.

Hopefully, this will help people come to grips with the implications of the carbon bubble, and make people think more critically about the appropriateness of building long-lived new fossil fuel infrastructure like pipelines.

What’s finite and what’s flexible

We know that we are trapped within an economic system that has it backward; it behaves as if there is no end to what is actually finite (clean water, fossil fuels, and the atmospheric space to absorb their emissions) while insisting that there are strict and immovable limits to what is actually quite flexible: the financial resources that human institutions manufacture, and that, if imagined differently, could build the kind of caring society we need.

Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate. p. 347 (hardcover)

“Love Will Save This Place”

The power of this ferocious love [for places where people live and where they care about] is what the resource companies and their advocates in government inevitably underestimate, precisely because no amount of money can extinguish it. When what is being fought for is an identity, a culture, a beloved place that people are determined to pass on to their grandchildren, and that their ancestors may have paid for with great sacrifice, there is nothing companies can offer as a bargaining chip. No safety pledge will assuage; no bribe will be big enough. And though this kind of connection to place is surely strongest in Indigenous communities where the ties to the land go back thousands of years, it is in fact Blockadia’s defining feature.

Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate. p. 342 (hardcover)

Bill McKibben on Obama’s climate change denial

In response to the decision to let Shell drill for oil in the arctic:

This is climate denial of the status quo sort, where people accept the science, and indeed make long speeches about the immorality of passing on a ruined world to our children. They just deny the meaning of the science, which is that we must keep carbon in the ground.

We are past the point where rhetorical acknowledgment of climate change is an acceptable response. Decision-makers today need to be taking serious strides to leave most of the world’s remaining fossil fuels unburned.

Burial wishes

A limited effort expended to try to find the comment thread where I explained my preference to be buried in a simple sheet without being embalmed – so as to better return to nature – hasn’t been immediately simple to find.

I really like this idea of making soil from the bodies of the dead. It reinforces the essential point that we are part of the biosphere of the Earth. Putting your remains temporarily in some sealed box is futile and unnatural. The relationship between a particular batch of atoms and molecules with consciousness remains a philosophical and scientific quandary, but it’s surely better to quickly become part of life again rather than be a toxic corpse in a box.

Obviously, any usable organs I possess should be used for transplants or research or practice by doctors, but whatever they don’t want I would like to see composted in the way proposed by the Urban Death Project.

OMG NDP!

Too bad they have such a misguided climate and energy policy:

Party leader Rachel Notley has said on the campaign trail that she would withdraw support for the Northern Gateway pipeline, but the NDP is interested in proposals to expand the Trans Mountain line and build the Energy East pipeline to Atlantic Canada.

Of course, it would be hard to be worse than the Alberta PCs or Wildrose on this issue.