Friday 3rd of May 2024

global warming is real and anthropogenic...

saucisson...saucisson...

Effective leadership on climate change is in short supply. Are our leaders too stupid or too cynical to respond to the world’s greatest problem?

 

One of the more remarkable aspects of the debate about climate change is that something like 99 per cent of recognised climate scientists agree on the basic drivers and likely consequences of unmitigated global warming. While this is an unambiguous vindication of the scientific method, perhaps, there are still lots of people who genuinely believe that climate change is either not happening, isn’t caused by humans even if it is, or that there’s not much we can do about it anyway.

Even in democracies, where access to credible information is relatively unproblematic for those with the perseverance and skills to sift through the cacophony of voices and sources on the internet, making sense of complex scientific evidence and arguments is still a challenge. It’s a problem that is made worse by the politicisation of public policy and a consequent loss of confidence in the abilities and veracity of our elected representatives.

When many people do not have the expertise to judge the accuracy of complex arguments about both the nature of climate change or the best possible ways of trying to reduce its impact, their capacity to make informed judgements about initiatives like the Morrison government’s “Australia’s Long-term Emissions Reduction Plan” is necessarily restricted.

All of us who are not experts in the area are necessarily reliant to various degrees on those that are — or claim to be — experts to make sense of complex and competing claims.

It’s uncontroversial to suggest that the plan has been met with widespread incredulity and disappointment as it appears to deliver nothing new and relies on heroic assumptions about as yet unknown technological breakthroughs to achieve its goals. In such circumstances, it’s worth asking whether members of government are being deliberately deceitful or simply don’t understand the implications of unaddressed climate change and the implausible nature of its proposed “solutions”.

While we may not know what goes on in people’s heads or what ultimately motivates their actions, the fact that some of the most prominent supporters of the coal industry come from electorates where mining remains important is an unsurprising coincidence. The interesting question is whether the likes of Keith Pitt, Angus Taylor and Barnaby Joyce actually believe what they say about the mining or the cattle industries and their contributions to climate change.

Perhaps they really do, and are genuinely convinced that the predicted impacts of climate change are either overstated or can be addressed by as yet unknown technological innovations. But if they are cynically pedalling a narrative that serves their short-term political interests despite realising that it is actively contributing to what may be the greatest crisis the human race has ever faced then the rest of us have every right to be appalled.

So do their own children and anyone who is likely to be around at the turn of the century. What feat of psychological compartmentalisation allows them to privilege immediate political advantage over the future of their presumably beloved offspring? Being bribed to support the Coalition’s minimalist response to a national and global emergency no doubt helped. But what will they say to their children if — or more likely, when — they ask them what they did to save their futures?

Mathias Cormann is a noteworthy illustration of the genre. Having managed to secure a plumb post-retirement gig as secretary-general of the OECD, he has now declared his support for a carbon tax, having dutifully opposed it while finance minister. Cormann’s new stance is no doubt a reflection of his new role rather than a sudden epiphany about climate change, which makes his former slavish adherence to the party line and role in the downfall of Malcom Turnbull all the more inexcusable.

As for the prime minister Cormann helped to install, it remains an open question whether Scott Morrison actually believes technology will save the day and that Australia can avoid playing its part in “saving the planet”. Given that there is a growing consensus that it is probably already too late to avoid further dangerous climate-induced disasters in Australia and elsewhere, it seems difficult to believe that he and his government are driven solely by a short-term political calculus that consigns us and their own progeny to a potentially hellish future.

For those of us trying to deal with the cognitive dissonance induced by a debilitating combination of understanding and impotence, despair about the quality, intelligence, and principles of those who claim to lead us seems entirely appropriate. Unfortunately, Australia’s leaders are not the only ones who suffer from this malaise.

Joe Biden and Xi Jinping are respectively constrained by either dysfunctional domestic politics or the perceived need to keep the developmental show on the road at any cost. Others, like Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, combine personal egotism, stupidity and a seemingly pathological indifference to the consequences of his actions, which seems certain to consign Brazilians and the rest of us to a grizzly fate.

It is difficult to imagine how we can transform domestic, let alone international, political systems and the people who populate them in the time available to us to do something effective about climate change, or related questions of international security, for that matter.

Ironically, COP26 may only confirm both the need and the impossibility of doing so. Thankfully, I don’t have children asking awkward questions about their likely futures, but I’d be interested to know what our God-fearing prime minister tells his.

 

BY Mark Beeson — Professor of International Politics at the University of Western Australia.


His latest book is Environmental Anarchy? International Relations Theory and Practice in the Anthropocene, (Bristol University Press: 2021
He has also written Environmental Populism: The Politics of Survival; in the Anthropocene Plagrave 2019

 

Read more:

https://johnmenadue.com/stupid-or-cynical-how-our-leaders-contribute-to-climate-crisis/

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

pyromaniacs...

pyromoaniacspyromoaniacs

 

free JULIAN Assange now now now !!!!

girls, women, females, sheilas...

 

The international negotiations to save the planet from global warming is a "blokes' space", according to the former female president of the UN's climate change conference.

Key points:
  • Women are overrepresented among the world's poorest and are more vulnerable to the effects of climate change 
  • Female delegates occupy 33 per cent of roles at UN climate negotiations in 2021
  • Young Pacific-Islander women say most COP26 leaders and officials do not represent them or their communities
 

"It's been an endless problem to get women represented in the negotiation teams," Claire O'Neill, a former conservative UK MP and Energy Minister, told ABC News in Glasgow.

Diplomats and negotiators are now working through the details of global pledges and deals made at the COP26 summit, after two days of announcements and speeches from world leaders.

Women and girls were not being represented in those negotiations nor in public speeches at the international meet, said Ms O'Neill, who until January 2020 was the president of the summit.

"Many of them [negotiating teams] are still all male," she said, and warned that "if you're not at the table, you're on the menu".

"Climate change clearly has a bigger negative impact on women and girls around the world, they tend to be overrepresented in the poorest communities," she said.

Climate negotiations lack female representation: UN report

While the face of global action on climate change remains Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg, those inside the walls of the convention centre in Glasgow look and sound very different.

 

Women government delegates occupied on average 33 per cent of all positions at formal UN climate negotiations in 2021, a report released prior to the conference found.

"This denotes a lack of significant progress on female representation on constituted bodies," the report said.

Ms O'Neill said she was removed from her post as COP president-designate and replaced with male MP Alok Sharma not because of her gender, but because of "politics".

 

The UK as the host-nation of the global summit appoints a representative to lead the diplomatic and logistical efforts.

"[UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson] was perfectly within his rights. He wanted a minister to run the COP," said Ms O'Neill, who praised her successor's efforts at the summit.

Her comments come as finance ministers meet, and chief executives and business leaders from round the world front the conference making promises for climate finance.

"As much as we've tried really hard this year with panels, most of the world business council panels are only 30 to 50 per cent female," Ms O'Neill said.

 

Read more:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-04/un-climate-conference-blokes-space-former-president/100592712

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

a miracle won't happen...

Thirty-thousand attendees (“COP26, a grotesque mix of rent seekers, hangers-on and political wannabes”, smh.com.au, November 3). What a circus. Hollywood actors for God’s sake. A place where the Coalition’s smoke and mirrors act must fit right in. Life is a cabaret, old chum. No wonder Xi and Putin didn’t bother. We can only hope that in a back room somewhere, some serious people are negotiating some serious things. 

Brian Haisman, Winmalee

 

 

With the inevitable failure of the Blah Fest in Glasgow it seems clear that we, the people of Oz, face the climate crisis by heavily investing our own money in solar energy. It seems the wisdom resides with the people and we must do the work while Nero fiddles. 

Richard Hambly, Potts Point

 

 

Once again the PM relies on the glossy brochure and the grinning countenance to try to persuade everyone that he has a solid plan with lofty intentions about a noble cause (“PM talks tech as Glasgow summit stutters”, November 3). Yet he’s now trying to flick-pass responsibility for doing anything meaningful to scientists, techs and the like in the vague hope that they will somehow save the day.

We really shouldn’t be surprised. It’s the same old “I don’t hold the hose, mate” and “I have always believed in miracles” mentality. His focus is solely on self-preservation and, as his way of achieving it, he’s turned plausible deniability into an art form. 

Adrian Connelly, Springwood

   

How mortifying it is to be Australian represented by a Prime Minister who is variously ignored and actively snubbed at G20, and who gives his climate address in Glasgow to an all but empty room.

Alynn Pratt, Grenfell

 

Read more:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/pm-snubbed-on-world-stage-and-speaks-to-an-empty-room-20211102-p595ef.html

 

ScoMo is awaiting for a "scientific miracle" that probably won't happen... That's the way he can exonerate his own political arse by thus blaming science for not turning up with a solution...

historical sanitation...

by Cathy Wilcoxby Cathy Wilcox

 

Read from top. See also: 

 

a stabber in the back...

 

secondhand history...

 

global warming is a major problem for humanity... especially if you're a coal merchant...

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW ≈≈≈≈≈∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞!!!!

leading by example...

leadingleading

 

Read from top. 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW ≈≈≈≈≈∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞!!!!