The United Nations has fired a rocket up the arse of the developed world by ruling that climate refugees cannot be sent back to their homelands.
Given that the developed world, the industrialized nations, are responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions fueling global warming that is rendering the poorest and most vulnerable nations increasingly uninhabitable, leaving their beleaguered people the grim choice of migrating or staying put to die, it does seem only fair that we don't add mortal insult to lethal injury for these folks, especially their little kids. (I don't think I've ever written a sentence so complex)
Don't worry. It's only the UN. We'll find some excuse, plenty of them in fact, to reject this ruling. We'll bundle them up as "terrorists" or a threat to our beloved economies, you know, the bounty that God bestowed on us but not them, that sort of thing. And, yes, we'll look like utter swine but isn't that what the lipstick is for?
.. "huhh..!" The disgusted utterance escaping me during disbelief about something vile..
ReplyDeleteMy ancestors on both sides vacated Ireland very early 1800's.. well before the famine. Perhaps they suspected a below decks boat ride to Australia was in the offing.. they did have a liking for horses. Regardless they survived the passage, even got by the iceburgs, evaded Newfoundland shipwreck. That's why this pilgrim is here today & Canadian.
In the early morn here I saw a Twitter challenge.. What to do with Mar A Lago upon being seized as a crime scene if el Trumpo properties were seized. Well that was a no brainer to me. That's arable land and lots of it.
Turn it into an urban agriculture seed bed. Bring climate refugees or war & corruption refugees there for one year. Entire families. Initiate them learning urban agriculture setup, management, as well as English.. and assist them in setting up for their next destination. Detroit, Seattle, Los Angeles or smaller regional centers etc. When they depart the starting farms, they will have developed friends and skills and confidence in their new land. They will need and receive support in their next destination.. but the goal is they are seeds that have sprouted to activate, cultivate and spread the critical knowhow of urban agriculture. This is 'The Upside Of Down' Mound.. this is not being caged as wild beasts and their offspring stolen and lost to them. This is 'civilization' and community as opposed to stupidity and cruelty
The surplus produce from the experimental farm would also be distributed somewhat locally into food banks or further afield where needed. The new student farmers would receive payments while income also goes to the farm. All that process can be learned as well by the refugee farmers.
I know where I sprung from.. and from whom. They were not caged for coming to the new land instead of starving or expelled as criminals.. They found firm footing and persevered.. and then they thrived. What a concept !
I don't need to tell you who really deserves to be caged.. do I !
I have the same suggestion for The Gang Ranch, in central BC.
ReplyDeleteGoogle it! I can't say more, for fear of being persecuted.
I have your points, Sal, and yet the issue goes far beyond social justice. We're living on a planet where the biosphere is grossly overpopulated, made all the worse by increases in longevity and consumption rates over the past 40 years.
ReplyDeleteThe moral case is plain. We are predominantly responsible for the greenhouse gas emissions, the knock-on effects of which will render uninhabitable the nations that are least responsible for their plight. Atoning for that sin appears to be the thrust of this UN ruling. The developed/industrial nations that created their hell on Earth can't punish them twice by first rendering their homelands uninhabitable and then refusing them refuge from our very handiwork.
That said, what are we to do? The industrialized nations will be impacted by climate change to varying degrees eventually. Camilo Mora's climate team predict that "climate departure" will set in through the equatorial/tropical regions in the next few years and will then extend poleward, north and south, over the following 25-30 years. That sets up a host of problems. The southern US is a good example.
The southern states face severe climate events of increasing frequency, intensity and duration. How bearable that will be depends on a mix of factors including how the various levels of government can deal with loss and dislocation.
The Bush/Cheney era left America weakened and vulnerable. The crash of 2007-8 was all but ordained by reckless spending (two wars of choice) accompanied by irresponsible tax cuts. Obama was able to prevent the recession from turning into a full-blown depression by bail outs and stimulus funding but only just. Were that to happen again, there's no reserve to repeat that sort of rescue.
At the municipal, state and federal levels, governments are tapped out in this, the era of "everyday low taxes." The climate crisis could leave the US facing a significant problem of "internally displaced population" or IDPs. Whether it's sea level rise, the collapse of groundwater resources, worsening and sustained floods and droughts, people will be forced to relocate. For most of us, our homes and land are our only significant asset. What happens when those assets become all but worthless? How are they to get a fresh start somewhere else? Relocation will be massively expensive and the funds are going to have to come from somewhere.
As the states confront their internal dilemma how likely is it that they will have the means to accommodate climate migrants?
This is where you get into the lifeboat paradox. How do you choose who is to survive and who will be sacrificed? It brings up some pretty primal questions that we have been spared these past 70 plus years. This brings to mind a line from a Gwynne Dyer book to the effect that, even the kindest tribe will slaughter the neighbours before it watches its own children starve.
.. good points.. the lifeboat analogy is excellent. I remember it from a ways back.
ReplyDeleteIt seems we are in some sort of 'triage' moments. The USA by nature of geographical location is getting refugees and migration etc.. but realistically its only a trickle.. its akin to Italy and Portugal etc getting boat people from Africa or other gathering points. England finding migrants in trucks that crossed the Channel. When it becomes even a minor or sporadiic flood though, all bets are off re compassion or willingness to absorb them. Same for Mexico/USA
Here in Canada eh, we have no f'n idea what is to come.. and it will come. Alberta for sure has no f'n idea, especially with the diseased majority government ruling it.. But the brunt of it will land on BC in my view. The will to survive will make a gold rush look like a children's sandbox game. Has the reality of contemporary Australia and New Zealand somehow evaded our political animals tiny thought processes ?
And a grim reminder.. the countries with the fastest growing populations rely on seafood for protein. Climate change is impacting ocean temperature is disastrous ways.. catastrophic ways. I have no analogy to draw upon ! In our contemporary world we have never seen anything like this.. much less what is to come.
Sal, I think you've captured the essence of our predicament when you point out that the future will be unprecedented. When the great economists of the day, including people such as Krugman, divine the future they often omit from their math the many impacts of climate change - in the atmosphere, on the land, in the ocean depths.Yet it's hard to fault them for this because even the climate science types are still being overtaken by events.
ReplyDeleteBTW - my beautiful BSA shown in the photo to the right played a central role in my dreams last night. There was something about an urgent ride in the dead of night through a still countryside. Brings back some of my fondest memories of racing into the darkness at breakneck speeds. That, my friend, is when you most feel alive.