In this small zine publication, is embedded my formal essay to address the issue of why the f*ck politics don’t do sh*t to truly solve global warming. Now, I am no expert on the subject, and do not pretend to be, therefore, feel free to question my reasoning, or the ideas I borough from men and women in the spotlight. This is merely me trying to change the true debate of the environment we witness in the news, and social media, to why are we still having it? ‘Curiosity is a willing, a proud, an eager confession of ignorance.’ S. Leonard Rubinstein This is where mine took me.
They are many people whom still don’t believe in global warming, shown in a Gallup pole saying 1 in 4 americans don’t believe in it. This shows the power of formulating pole, this almost discredited the validity, and urgency of global warming yet bring no statistics to the issues, nor solution, simply maybe we shouldn’t care or feel guilty for not caring.
What is interesting is the pressure that is placed on the populations, individuals to make efforts, to reduce our waste, energy use etc… this harassment of inflicted guilt is to be frank, annoying, and becomes easier to ignore and give the finger to. It can be argued with the rational, from “the honest truth about dishonesty” by professor Dan Ariely, through the ‘what the hell effect’ if I’m going to to cheat a little, I might as well be completely bad; rather then be kind of good, thus frustrated. In a culture where abundance, and instant gratification is primordial. Secondly, it is easier to to ignore something with a distance to your direct action, not reducing any type of waste is bad. but it wont really affect your cosy life. It’s the collective laxism which is the root issue.
Hold up thats not true we do give a sh*t. The people’s climate march, starting in New York City, spread over 2646 rallies, 162 countries, all the way to Paris, Melbourne Australia, Rio de Janeiro. this shows a true concern, but mostly a care for action to be taken. We are sick of the top down effort being enforced, blaming individuals on reducing individual waste of energy, and consumerism, while bigger business are to some extent exempt from responsibility. This is interesting to then see our response is wanting more from a bigger industries which can have the power for greater impacts.
First, I would like to put forward the idea that global warming isn’t sexy. Politicians like sexy subject with great inspirational slogan, while global warming, follows mostly, with ‘effort need to be made’, ‘change’, and ‘restrictions’; so as I said, global warming isn’t sexy.
On the other hand, the issue, and reason, for a lack of action can be seen through a cynical approach to politics. The more money you receive in donation, the higher your chance of being elected. However, money always comes at a price, countering the ideology of a donation, to be free of any returned favours. For instance, when you look at Barack Obama’s contributors, of his 2012 campaign including: Deloitte LLP, a consulting, and risk management company, or IBM, you should understand that they expect his mandate to be favourable to their business practices. The total of dirty energy money invested in 2012 for political campaigns amassed to $116 000 000, just in america. Maybe money can speak louder then words here. More obviously you may look at the 163 members of congress that deny basic tenets of climate science, and earn on average 3.5 time more money just through dirty energy money, thus a $346 975 in comparison to a $96 999. You understand they motivation to disrupt the climate progress. This money is just for them to slow down, or destroy legislations that aren’t favourable to their investor. Closer to home, for instance here, in the UK, less then 10% of MP’s turned up for the climate change debate, this last 19th of November 2015. At the end of the day energy is a business, and so is being a politician. Such an environment is when you start seeing great debating skills in politics, with Jim Inhofe bringing a snowball as evidence against global warming… should I say more?
Now politician especially during election address the environmental issues, with great speeches and promises, yet no actual plan, or realisation to carry out the promises. Nigel Lawson, a British conservative politician, and journalist, rebels against the political correctness of our time, the curse preventing any proper debate. He wrote his book, ‘An appeal to reason, a cool way to look at global warming’, to respond to his shock that no economical analysis had been done on the decarbonisation program so popular among politicians, as he quoted, ‘hell is paved with good intension’. We need to stop taking away funds from scientist with doubt, or politician, being taken away any prospect of promotion, when expressing differing opinions, this means no debate, no analysis can be thorough, or the resultant to a solution. So with political correctness you get happy pictures, and shitty result.
You are not the only one to see the great wall we are heading into, to worry about the future generation, what will they be left with? Thankfully, you get activist expressing their unhappiness, calling for change. Recently, the Tate has been put in the spotlight for accepting donations from, BP, a rather controversy filled company, after too many oil spills destroying our oceans. The main heat being on their presence throughout the museum, everywhere, patronage should be more selfless perhaps; not a way to diminish their wrong doing. We expect better, not a bow around their brand to look better, or politician, being taken away any prospect of promotion, when expressing differing opinions, this means no debate, no analysis can be thorough, or the resultant to a solution. So with political correctness you get happy pictures, and shitty result.
Perhaps, instead of blaming the lack of funding as an excuse for the lack of efficiency. Governments could start rethinking where they spend it, for instance is it necessary to spend According to the Office of Management and Budget and the Air Force Almanac, when measured in real terms the figure is $790.0 billion, or an average of $15.818 billion per year.
To conclude this political bashing, I would like to let you think, and ponder this issue. Do you care? Do you want to care? or was this annoying? no matter what I think, today we can no longer deny the global warming urgency, but most importantly let on politician not be fully accountable for their campaign promises. Use the power of social media, such as twitter, to voice your opinion, and be proud of your convictions. The greatest issues come from lack of education, and the more we talk to one another the better our chances for change.