Friends, the talk-fest in Bali is well and truly underway and has a cast of thousands. The problems of global warming are being discussed honestly by some nations, with deceit by others, and with outright stubbornness by the above mentioned nations.
While Australia has finally signed Kyoto, Rudd refuses to set emission targets until his government receives a comprehensive report in June, 2008 (but says he will do so). The other three countries, at this stage, refuse to set any targets at all and of course, ironically, this includes America, the world's biggest polluter.
It is interesting to reflect upon the sudden impact that climate change has had upon the world. The capitalist world was going gangbusters with each country trying to outdo the others in terms of manufacturing and the production of automobiles, arms, energy production, etc. Some countries were even engaging in acts of imperialism so that they could secure and control scarce resources like oil. Then a few scientists came along and threw a spanner into the works by suggesting that the heavy and increasing use of fossil fuels was destroying our world.
The capitalist world is in turmoil! There's money to be made from selling coal, oil, petrol-guzzling consumer goods, etc, huge amounts of it, but the price might be to render our world uninhabitable. What to do? What to do?
That urgent change is required is indisputable. But given the power that Big Business has over most Western governments and the fear of most politicians of a voter backlash should governments embrace and enforce quick, drastic change means that foot-dragging, purposeful procrastination, active ambivalence and downright denial will become popular activities during the next few years. It is likely that profit will continue to take precedence over prudence and plain commonsense!
Meanwhile the rapid destruction of our fragile planet will continue, perhaps past the point of no return.
Perhaps it already is!
UPDATE: 16/12/2007.
Australia helped to get America to stop its selfish stonewalling and a kind of consensus was reached although no firm targets were set. Rudd shone on the world stage and his Ministers acquitted themselves well.
Rudd's success emphasizes just how out-of-touch sycophantic Howard really was!
Photo Link.
16 comments:
I don't know why some people think they will be able to survive what is coming, but the constant delay and 'study' of global warming has made it inevitable. And it's happening a lot faster than even pessimistic scientists have thought.
But the Pope says not to worry, so everything is okay, right?
Wonder how many tonnes of greenhouse gases the Vatican generates, Nancy? And I'm not talking about the human ones either!
I thought Mr.Rudd ratified Kyoto immediately upon being elected?
But that's still not enough.
Read about California being sued by the car companies for insisting that they meet environmental standards that were proposed oh, thirty years ago.
They don't WANT to change, they don't WANT to obey the law, and they don't care. Now it's too late to stop what is happening. Their damn fool 'religion' says it's all right since the world won't be needed for much longer.
I'd like to make this sort of belief grounds for committment to a psychiatric institution, but that would mean removing a lot of politicians and business leaders. It's so much easier to believe idiocy like that than to take responsibility and think for yourself.
The Pope is sticking his schnauze (Berlin slang for nose) where it doesn't belong. I really believe that Pagans got it right...if you worship a lake or a tree, chances are you won't destroy it.
Your last paragraph contains much truth, Anony! And business leader and politicians have only two things on their mind: profit and power!
Cheers.
It turns out the Pope has been much maligned. He did not say what he was supposed have said. He said that the world should be treated with respect. Good on ya, Pope.
Frankly I am so sick at what passes for journalism in the USA I'm going to be cheering when I move to Canada next summer. I just wish I had agreed to move now (there is six inches of snow on the ground and I still had a contract to fulfil, otherwise I'd have been out of here like a bullet.)
Not that it will make much of a difference to the climate.
Nancy, his view on contraception seems to be at odds with treating the world with respect!
I lived in Canada for three years. I loved the place and the people and the snow.
Take care now.
G'day again Daniel,
it's a lovely day here, leafy-green and birds a-twitter; soon I will stroll over 'the coathanger' to my favourite bookshop and then on for a German Bier with lunch.
What an utter bastard then, to have it all under threat from the *decades* of inaction! The time to have started was on getting "Club of Rome" type warnings. The US made a step in the right direction with their CAFE laws; promptly side-lined 'over there' by the fuel guzzling SUV concept, here 4WD behemoths.
And of course, population - and here there's no escape for the Catholic & US subversions on contraception policy. Also to be condemned is the "jam them in" immigration policy of the Libs, hopefully soon to be wound back. It's not as if we should wish to "pull the ladder up," most Aus cities are on the limit of their water supplies, and if we have to reduce CO2 (we do, we do!) then de-sal can't save us.
Wringing hands is no help; we need action and I think that Rudd is on the right path, he *can't* commit to reductions before Garnaut reports - but I'm pretty sure he'll *do the right thing*, soonest. Here's a report.
We trust that Rudd won't bend to the will of Big Business or put being re-elected before moving on climate change. It's a balancing act that Houdini would find difficult!
Enjoy your lunch and the German Bier!
I do believe Mr Rudd should be allowed two weeks to recover fully from a ten month Election Rally, before being expected to sign off on any specific agenda.
I would rather he represents Australia and gets it right because the homework's been done, than be rushed off his feet and be unable to sustain "promises" made in haste.
After 11 years of Howard I can wait another six months for implementation based on the facts as the Labor Government understands them.
Japan and America have both declared wars on other countries and killed their citizens...why would we expect them to treat an environment with any more respect than human life?.
The problem is, Mary, that Rudd, by not agreeing to any targets until mid-next year, appears to be part of the American-led stonewallers and leaves himself and Australia open to criticism. It's a question of appearances!
After Howard, we desperately need to change our appearance!
G'day Daniel,
the Bier (Rülps!) was Reinheitsgebot, and you just can't do better than that; price *AND* quality control in one short, plain-text law.
"Hopfen und Malz, Gott erhalts." No additives allowed, no preservatives or any other corrupting ingredients. Would that our politics follow the spirit!
The bookshop visit paid off, as it often does. More on that later.
I agree with Mary, Rudd should be given a bit more time to establish his direction. The old bug-bear is in play; unfair treatment from the venal majority of the MSM. I've noticed, far too often, that SBS in particular has been 'bad-mouthing' (Ameri-speak (spit!)) the new government; it might pay them be a bit more careful.
I watch SBS and ABC most of the time, Phil, and I can't say that I've noticed anything too anti-Rudd. Barry, on the Insiders, was a bit miffed that Rudd didn't appear on his show!
Perhaps I'm still on Cloud 9 following Howard's rout! I promise to pay more attention. Cheers!
G'day Daniel,
I'm surprised that you might need convincing.
Recall the general thesis; that the kleptocracy is propagandising us via the venal majority in the MSM. I like to 'start' with the A-bombing of Japan, whereby the propaganda-story was that the double A-bombing was needed to save US-grunts' lives. I call the propaganda-narrative the 'pushed paradigm;' it is by endless repetition of such filthy lies that 'victor's history' is pushed down our throats. There were many arguments in play vis-à-vis the A-bombing; to show the world and the Russians in particular that the US would use it, to gather data on the actual use (the 'targets' were almost toadally® 'pristine,' all the better to get 'clean' data), and perhaps the vilest, that the US had paid a motza for the bombs, they'd get into trouble if *not* used. Counter-arguments were also present; doing a demo say, without actually killing anyone. Might'a been enough just to show film from 'Trinity.' We do know that Japan was trying to surrender, that the US was stalling, and that the Russians were coming. Based on what I now know, and how the US has acted over the long-term (see Blum, say, 'the Salvador option,' Iraq in general, "Shock'n whore®") I assume the worst. You?
Sorry (but not too sorry) for what might appear to be a detour here, but the point I wish to put is this: by the joining in such MSM conspiracies, whereby history is *mangled* (aka the sheople® lied to), the AusBC and SBS depart their responsibilities.
A more modern example was cited by me recently (with links, but recall also I'm working off the laptop;) the item was on SBS and came from CNN, it was about Iraqi oil. To complete this little loop: GWBush&Co said they were *not* in it for the oil (har, har) when they Oh, so obviously were, are & will forever be (unless kicked out by superior force, possibly moral force, hence the 'honest united.') The SBS/CNN report said that the US (UK, Aus) were there guarding Iraqi oil - and if they stopped or otherwise failed to so guard, the world would likely descend into economic chaos, including less/no fuel for SUVs (here 4WDs.) Shock, horror: B, B & H are actually saving the world (as SUV/4WD drivers see it) - saving that world by pink-mist mass-murdering 1mio+ Iraqis.
That sort'a thing is what I mean by SBS propagansising us. Boo! Hiss! And the AusBC often carries similar narratives.
It's not only my thesis; how else can the kleptocracy get ever richer, unless they muddy the waters? (In plain text, they get rich by mostly criminal means.) Finally, it's not just *what* they say, but how, and two women 'stand out' in employed innuendo, namely the 'breakfast bag,' aka Fran Kelly and the 'SBS bag,' aka Karen Middleton. In the run-up to the election both of these women were hyper-active pro-Howard, and although they 'lost,' they have not relaxed. The 'offending' broadcasts are not well documented (either no transcripts or too hard to find), otherwise I could/would easily do some quotes. The recent offerings from SBS/Bali illustrate my point, whereby Middleton implies Rudd as being 'in the poo.' You used this type of report yourself in condemning Rudd for not acting, or not acting fast enough.
In this respect (Rudd possibly not acting fast enough), finally recall that he's been in opposition, whereby Howard was not. Howard did not (as far as we know) direct the Aus bureacracy to develop greenhouse action plans; Rudd is effectively starting from cold. And so deserves a better, fairer shake, from Kelly, Middleton et al.
Your point about dropping the A-bomb on an uninhabited area of Japan is an interesting one, Phil. But it would've been out of character for Americans to take a soft option when images of vapourised people on walls was on offer.
I agree that Rudd must be given a chance and he is off to a great start. Then he really didn't have to do much to outshine Howard, did he?
Why the hitherto left-wing ABC and SBS would be anti-Rudd I can't really imagine. Are certain broadcasters receiving cash-for-comment incentives now that Laws has gone? Cheers.
Once again you surprise me Daniel, by quoting part'a the 'pushed paradigm' as fact: "the hitherto left-wing ABC and SBS..."
Could you possibly provide some proof of this worthless(?), unsubstantiated(!) allegation? OK; I *am* friendly, nevertheless. I did a piece on alleged AusBC bias here. Perhaps we could pursue this theme? I think you illustrate exactly what I mean, by repeating "something everyone agrees on" when the only thing that is observable is constant repetition of an unsubstantiated piece of (lying!) propaganda; if this looks circular it's because it is: propaganda is usually based on lies, asserted repeatedly. I mean, look to who makes the allegation: Senator Alston and Harry Heidelberg/David Davis, among other cretins.
What's more dismaying than any Rudd equivocation on climate change - he has said it just about tops his list in importance - is his assertion (unsubstantiated(?) unsubstantiable(?!)) - that he regards the US as, on balance, a positive force in the world. I have to violently disagree; it is the US 'leading' us alright, but straight down the tubes...
Phil, my view of the ABC and SBS is based upon decades of thoughtful viewing and evaluation and not because I'm a victim of 'constant repetition of an unsubstantiated piece of propaganda.' My whole blog rests upon the premise of questioning ALL sacred cows!
Also, I would request no further mention of personalities from other blogs as becoming involved in blog wars is not on my agenda at all. I have enough trouble dealing with issues like Bush, Capitalism, Religion, etc.
I do agree with you about Rudd's incorrect assessment of America. But then, cleverly, he might be thinking of other ways to skin a cat rather than a direct frontal attack! Cheers.
Post a Comment