Most of us living in developed countries today have a good level of understanding of what global warming is, what causes it, and what the future impacts are likely to be. Science has increased our climate change knowledge hugely over the last few decades. And yet most of us continue driving our cars, eating meat for every meal, powering our houses with energy from fossil fuels, and shopping for more material items at every chance. So why is it that we don’t care enough about climate change to change our ways?
The thing is, we do care. It’s just that we don’t see any good solution being put forward. Most journalism around global warming has focused on climate change as a catastrophe, reporting on the topic with a distinct air of doom and despair. It’s not that I don’t think this is true, but if we’re trying to get people to care about climate change, and change their own behaviour, it probably isn’t the way to go.
We all have other things in life that we need to put our caring towards — our health, livelihood, community and relationships for a start. Why is that or who makes us do that? Our grandparents did quite differently, besides having their own difficulties. There were no media, advertisements, and other influential factors in those days. But the ignorance was extensively there, how countries and businesses were managed.
Portugal replaced the native trees (oak and pine) with imported Eucalyptus. Trees that exacerbate deadly fires. Their sap is flammable, and so is their bark, which flies off when burned, igniting new fires up to 100 yards away. The greed of Eucalyptus commercial value, 10-15% of the Portuguese state went in smoke in less than a generation. Destroyed the eco-system which was already damaged when native trees were cut for shipbuilding and maintenance in mid-century.
“The massive naval construction during the maritime expansion (mainly in the 15th–16th centuries) involved felling of approximately 5 million trees mainly Quercus suber, Pinus pinea and other Quercus species. Cumulative fuel-wood consumption of 959 Mm3 during 1300–1854 was attributed to demographic expansion while the deforestation rate from 1636–1854 accounted for a minimum of 72.6% and a maximum of 96% of total forest cover. The volume of timber used in railway sleepers from 1856 onward might have reached 0.5 Mm3. The last quarter of the 20th century increased the forest cover of Portugal through the World Bank program of Eucalyptus globulus reforestation”.
The Portuguese World Bank Eucalyptus reforestation program is a perfect example of how the Bankers swindle our natural heritage in the name of combating global warming. Not only do they do it at a profit, but they also use international funding. There are hundreds of cases like this.
- Indonesian yearly forest fires. 2019 brought with it some of the worst fire levels in years. 328,724 hectares of land burnt this year from January to August. Many farmers clear vegetation for palm oil, pulp and paper plantations using a slash-and-burn method. The problem has accelerated in recent years as more land has been cleared for expanding plantations for the lucrative palm oil trade.
Countries that get affected by the fire haze, such as Malaysia, hundreds of schools have been forced to close after the haze reached “very unhealthy levels” of 208 on the Air Pollutants Index (API) in several districts.
The 2015 crisis cost the country $16bn (£12bn) and caused more than 500,000 people to suffer from respiratory ailments – a state of emergency was declared. Under President Joko Widodo, it has named 10 corporations as suspects and said it is investigating more than 100 individuals. Almost four years later, the forests in Indonesia continue to burn.
The haze…most of the palm oil plantations in Indonesia where the fires are going on are owned and financed by Malaysian businessmen. These same capitalists are also the ones controlling the government so the Malaysian government will not do anything about the forest fires.
When do we start caring?
In the winter of 2014, the UK experienced unprecedented levels of flooding. Many homes flooded, with major disruption also to transport, power and communications, with the government estimating an economic cost of £1300 million for the floods as a whole. A YouGov poll showed that after the floods had taken place respondents were much more concerned about the environment and climate change.
Clearly, being able to physically see environmental impacts has more of an effect on our levels of caring and propensity to taking action than reading scientific reports of the catastrophe to come. But do we have to wait until the disaster before acting?
So how do we get people to start caring?
If young girls like Greta Thunberg and Malala Yousafzai were able to activate the mass, what’s missing with us. Are we afraid of getting a bullet in our heads? Can we not start putting our priorities in front of us. Collectively expose the society/world what is actually wrong with the human, governmental, and trading behaviour. And together with like-minded people start building the grassroots.
Start with solid ideas and samples showing the public how things should be done. We have access to worldwide knowledge and information through our sectors and regions. Members who live in those problematic areas. Spread the news, such as this website. If the Neohumanists reach the 3.8% rule, the change may happen.