‘I think we should just ignore it. It will be bad for the economy.’
‘Are you sure? I mean… it is obvious we will get in big trouble if we don’t do anything!’
“Nah… if we do what these “scientists” are telling us, it will damage the economy!”
‘But… surely you can see the economy lives inside nature, not the other way round…!?’
‘Nah… We will not damage the economy for this… this… natural phenomena, whatever it is. We will find the technological solution for it.’
‘Mate… I am sorry but gravity doesn’t give a fuck about the economy.’
Human constructs. Nature.
Do we really think we can pick and choose which natural phenomena we have to live by? How is it that the western society allows itself such abysmal levels of short sightedness?
Unlike gravity, climate change is human made: contrary to the debates still promoted on mainstream media, 96-98% of the scientists that work on the filed agree that climate change is human generated (1). There is no actual discussion about this and there hasn’t been for a long time. The matter is settled.
But this is actually beside the point.
Even if climate change was a natural phenomena, we would still have to deal with it. In theory, this wasn’t supposed to be not a big deal; as a species, we are incredibly adaptable. We are quite intelligent. We can change our environment and change ourselves in order to achieve fantastic things. But the problem is that now… now we have our top scientists currently working on the issue have said we have 12 years left to do it (2, 3).
The problem seems to be that in order to do something about this, we would have to fix the western mind’s dellusion… I mean, change western culture.
We would have to address some very core aspects of the western view of the world. Some core developmental issues that created
We would have to have deep conversations about carbon footprint, consuming habits, work, pets, diet, material culture, property, land, minorities, feminism, social justice, colonisation. Then, since we started, we may as well go a bit deeper and get into cosmology, self, other, unconscious, ego, health, mind, metaphysics, cosmologies, materialism, realism, positivism, judaeo-christian religions… oh my.. wait, I better stop.
Let’s say that these conversations would actually lead to something. Some sort of change to the way we understand nature and our place in it… a type of revolution in an area of our relationship with our environment that has long last its basis in the natural order of the ecosystem in which it lives, the system that intermediates our cultural ideas and the actual natural world… some sort of revolution in the… in the… the economy.
Oh no, let us not dare!
Perhaps instead we should start working on a social theory of how humans don’t need air. Maybe, if we work really hard on it, in a few years we can stop breathing.
What about if we decided that sleeping is no longer necessary, that what we will do from now on is to stay awake for ever. Maybe only 95% of scientists think that sleep is actually necessary, so we can really bank on those 5%.
Or perhaps we should spiral deeper and deeper into a species-wide suicide to try to maintain a socio-economic-cultural construct that assumes infinite resources within a finite system and completely disregards the biosphere upon which its very survival depends on while simultaneously promoting ethnocentric values of competition, individualism and materialism – leading to a mental health epidemic – and just carry on with business as usual because the economy… (4)
Ah cool. We got a winner. We definitely will make this one work.
‘Of course I won’t jump off of a building; gravity will kill me!’