Can the West be ‘taxed’ on climate?
This is an opinion piece just published online in 'The Punch' about the famed 'hip-pocket reflex' of Australian voters and the danger it entails for us all in the face of climate change and political jostling.
Australia, congratulations. We now boast a brand new opposition leader from the far-Right, who proudly declared, say, eight or nine times in a single interview on Tuesday that he would not support climate change legislation, terming it a ‘big new tax’ on the Australian people.So here we have the new political tactic of our Right- simple, snappy, and to the point- “that other lot want to TAX you!”
This tactic is nothing new, of course. Ben Chifley once observed that the Australian public ‘votes from the hip-pocket reflex’. The Right is simply banking that this is still the case. Shrewd.
Never mind that such a reflex, if the Western world cannot overcome it, will almost certainly destroy our planet. Never mind that. A ‘big new tax’? That’’s bad. No need for that. No sir.
And so, here, my friends, is the ultimate tragedy of the commons, excitedly limbering itself up for what looms as its greatest triumph. The Right wants power. Fossil fuel companies want profits. Voters don’t want taxes. And meanwhile, (according to the scientists, at least) climate disaster looms. So cue the violins. This will be a tragedy to impress even the ancient Greeks.
At the heart of this potential tragedy, however, is not fiction, but a simple truth. And this truth is one that the West are going to have to confront very soon if the project of civilization begun by its Grecian forefathers is going to stand a chance of continuation.
This truth is, folks, that we are obscenely spoiled.
Sorry West.
Really.
We have too much, we consume too much, and we want too much. Even the relatively poor among us.
An unemployed friend of mine, for example, calculated his wealth on the global rich list, and ranked amongst the top 10% richest people on this planet.
Or me. I am a student, with a low-paying part time job. Yet nonetheless, I can (normally) eat any kind of food I please. I can access any artwork, any movie, any literature, or any music I please. I can get any kind of health care I need, and access a world-class education with ease. And even with my comparatively low social status within the West, I could travel, if I wished, to any nation on Earth tomorrow.
Now, I am not suggesting that we all take a vow of poverty and renounce all our possessions. For one thing, I know that this will never happen. And for another, many trappings of modern life, especially those enabling information sharing, have vast potential for helping us to bring about the positive changes we desperately need- so it would be foolish to abandon them now. What I am trying to illustrate, rather, is the enormous responsibility that each of us has as a result of the wealth and power that we in the West have been born into.
Because truly, in the context of human history, the standard of living that we currently enjoy is astounding. Our lives would have been unimaginable to every single generation that has come before us, and are incomprehensible to the vast majority of humans alive today. Yet somehow, we treat this life as if it is our birth-right. Somehow, we don’t, by and large, consider ourselves rich. And we don’t, by and large, feel any special debt towards the rest of the world as a result of enjoying this level of wealth.
But indebted we are. Each and every one of us.
Because here is the rub. Our wealth, which somehow most of us so easily take for granted, has come to us directly from an economic system built from the ground up with fossil fuels. This is a fact. And no aspect of our lives is exempt. Everything each of us have, everything we own, and everything we ‘earn’ is inextricably linked to these fuels. Our parents’ houses. Our cars. Every holiday we have ever taken. Our clothes. The Internet on which this blog is posted. And the very computer you are using to read it.
All of this, without exception, would not be ours if it wasn’t for our society’s past and present use and abuse of fossil fuels.
So all of this, without exception, is stolen goods.
Stolen goods, because of what this economic system has taken away from our planet and its people. Taken from the millions of people around the world losing their lives, homes or livelihoods to climate change every single year. Taken, from the thousands of other species currently going extinct as a result of our environmental destruction. And taken from the hands of our very own children, who look likely never to experience the same world, with its diversity and bountiful resources that we have enjoyed.
So yes, we do have a debt. Each and every one of us. And that Westerners would baulk at any cost associated with mitigating and repairing the destruction wrought by the economic system that has given us such privileges is simply obscene.
So no, West. Climate change policies will never be a ‘tax’ upon us. In fact, they are a reparation- insufficient, and long over due.
Paul is the auto-immune disease of western civilisation. He is but an immune cell, operating under false assumptions; trying to destroy that which has kept him safe, well and nourished all these years. It’s such a shame his mind has been poisoned by the marxists.
Here are some links that will show falling child mortality, falling death rates from severe weather and falling death rates from water born diseases; all of which were made possibly by burning coal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/world/10child.html
http://www.csccc.info/reports/report_23.pdf
http://www.euro.who.int/watsan/issues/20050218_1
Tally the lives saved and be silent. If not, please nominate who’s lives are ‘stolen goods’. There are billions alive today, directly as a result of our evil, electricity loving, medicine developing, strip mining, diesel buring, coal burning ways. Names and addresses will be fine.
My response:
Nathan H, your point is pretty interesting. However, I never said that the Industrialized world had not produced advances. What I was saying is that alongside its beneficiaries, it has produced (and will produce many more) victims- and that this gives those who benefit so much from the system, i.e. us, a moral responsibility to care for said victims.
Let's do some philosophy here ;).
Say you have built a private hospital that has saved thousands of lives, and has also made you extremely wealthy. However, in its building, you were negligent on safety codes, and so eventually the hospital collapses, killing hundreds. Does the fact that the hospital saved lives exonerate you from any responsibility for compensating the victims and their families? No, that would be callous.
Likewise, the industrialized world has saved lives, certainly. But that does not exonerate it from a responsibility to compensate its victims.
Yours for climate justice,
Paul
Paul-
Crazy interesting article. Thanks for posting it.
As for “Nathan H,” well he just doesn’t get it.
And I wish i could just not get it.
Some of us are just not so lucky.
By Rose Monahan, State College, PA, USA on Tue, 08/12/2009
I agree with you that we are, comparatively speaking, spoiled beyond belief. We have and consume much more that is necessary to sustain life. However, I moderate that by considering that life is much more than survival. Recognizing that quality of life issues differ from country to country, and that for aborigines high quality of life might just be an extra helping of home-brew alcohol, or an extra bite of food, some of the great cultural advances of the day - those which make us human, and even give us the motivation to recognize and care about the plight of the less fortunate, have been made possible by our relative prosperity.
In abject poverty no one is making the great works of art or music, or writing the seminal novel. So we ought not completely dismiss the benefits made possible by striving for affluence.
More importantly, though, I wanted to probe your source for the paragraphs in your post. Specifically: “Taken from the millions of people around the world losing their lives, homes or livelihoods to climate change every single year. Taken, from the thousands of other species currently going extinct as a result of our environmental destruction.” This is sweeping and I hope meant by you as sensationalism, and not the reporting of fact.
I stay pretty well abreast of the news, and have yet to hear of “millions” who have lost their homes to global warming. The closest I can come to that would be the tsunami of recent years, which was caused by the earths natural tectonic shifts, which are unrelated to global warming. As far as lives lost, or livelihoods lost due to global warming, these numbers don’t approach the missions either when linked to global warming. The economy, yes; advancing technology, yes; but not global warming - not “millions.”
And similarly, “thousands of species currently going extinct….” There are reports of species that have allegedly GONE extinct (some of these reports have been proved false) but these cannot all be linked to global warming. Deforestation, yes; man-made pollutants and poisons, yes; but not global warming. Perhaps at a stretch, they could be considered CONCURRENT with global warming, but they are certainly not CAUSED by global warming. I can find NO ONE who can identify a single species that has gone extinct because of global warming. And only in the most extreme scenario of the global condition in, say, the year 2100, could we identify even a few species that could not adapt to a temperature change, or the associated changing weather patterns. Meanwhile, additional species are being discovered every year, some of which may well have evolved because of changing climate. The diversity of life on earth may be changing, but it is certainly not dying.
So I believe your cataclysmic declaration to be false upon its face. This is why I hope that you are simply being sensationalist, and not believing that you are stating fact.
If you chose to reply to this in your blog, kindly also copy me at my e-mail address, as I have not been to your blog before, and don’t know when I will visit again.
Respectfully.
Walt Nicholes
By Walt Nicholes, Orem, Utah on Wed, 09/12/2009
Hi Paul,
Powerful article. I wince every time I hear the “T” word coming from Abbott’s mouth. I wish a journalist would ask the Liberals where they expect to get the money for their “Direct Action” climate change “policy”.
This is a moral issue. In a sense, this is the definitive tragedy of the commons. Thank you for doing so much more than your part in waking the rest of us up to it.
Duncan
By Duncan M, Brisbane, Australia on Wed, 09/12/2009
And what is so wrong with a new tax anyway? The idea that tax is somehow a bad thing is completely illogical. We pay tax because there is a cost to maintaining the political and social institutions that we need. Without tax we would have no government, no order, no ability to create or maintain law. It would become extremetly difficult to earn and retain money securely, to own property and for businesses to invest. Paying taxes effectively enables us to earn money. It is not theft by government. Compare the lives of those people in government-less states, where they pay no tax, to the lives of those in the western world who pay taxes and far better lives. Given the choice, I am sure that the untaxed citizens of Sudan would gladly pay tax if it enabled them to live in a safe, stable and secure country.
By Nick Pettitt, Melbourne on Tue, 15/12/2009
They DO pay taxes in Sudan! Big time!
Taxes, in and of themselves, do not make a society safe or secure. The people who make up that society must decide to do that. Taxes may be one means to an end, but the fact is that every man must either protect himself or hire someone to protect him. Every man must protect his own possessions or hire someone to protect them for him. Every man must determine what kind of government he will submit to, or someone else will make that decision for him.
The collection of taxes tends to centralize power, which is a powerful attractant to evil and conspiring men. When properly motivated these men, unrestrained, will make any excuse that they can to increase and increase taxes. This gives them the resources necessary to get and hold on to power.
Machiavelli had it all figured out. Most people don’t.
Walt
By Walt Nicholes, Orem, UTah on Wed, 16/12/2009