Ayn Rand and threats in our economic and political lives

Bill McKibben, author of “Falter: has the human game begun to play itself out?” writes two somewhat contradictory comments about Ayn Rand.

Sea level rising

On one hand he suggests that the novelist may have been one the most influential influences on the “Money Men” like Alan Greenspan, avatar of neoliberalism and the chief architect of the world’s economy in the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union and on the other hand that Rand might well have written with a crayon.

 Her ideas about the world are simple minded, one dimensional, and poisonous.Rand called her theory “objectivism”. It’s emotional core, channeled by Rand, is simple. Government is bad. Selfishness is good. Watch out for yourself. Solidarity is a trap. Taxes are theft. You are not the boss of me.1

Even without knowing how her influence was spread by people like Greenspan through the Thatcher-Reagan years, and became part of the formation of Paul Ryan, Rex Tillerson, and Mike Pompeo we can see this “philosophy” has permeated much of our political and social attitudes. McKibben comments that Donald Trump told USA Today that Rand’s first novel, “The Fountainhead”, was his favourite book.

Some kinship directions

The need for an attitude to existence not based on selfishness is becoming clearer to us in this time of COVID-19. Our understanding of kinship needs to be expanded to include as “kin” all humanity and indeed all of nature as we address the real threats to species survival where coronavirus stands with devastation of water resources, forced global migration, and climate change as existential threats.

Reference

1McKibben, B. (2020). Falter: has the human game begun to play itself out? New York: Henry Holt and Company. 

Australia’s bushfires and mitigation of climate change

Erica Alini of Global News reports on what Australia’s fires could mean for insurance and real estate in Canada.

Source: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/6693/production/_110495262_gettyimages-1151121024.jpg 

Climate risk analyst Karl Mallon, in a recent report from his firm, Climate Risk, projects that 720,000 homes, or five per cent of Australia’s housing stock, will be uninsurable by 2100 as coverage becomes unavailable or prohibitively expensive.

 Canada is not immune.
“The warmer it is the longer the fire season,” University of Alberta wildland fire professor Mike Flannigan told the Canadian Press. “The warmer it is the more lightning you see.”
For every degree of warming, the number of lightning strikes goes up by about 12 per cent, he said. Lightning usually causes more than half of the wildfires in Canada.
“We’re going to see a lot more. Not every year, but on average we’re going to see a lot more fire, a lot more smoke,” Flannigan said.1

Bill McKibben, author of “Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out?,” comments that as the world’s leading coal exporter, Australia is burning down its own house. Now Australia is suffering, harshly, the early effects of climate change. It turns out that its unique physical features are remarkably susceptible to the global warming that’s now in its early stages. The Great Barrier Reef has been damaged by several bouts of severe bleaching from hot ocean water. The enormous kelp forests that ringed Australia’s southern coasts have been all but wiped out. And now fire has come in a way it never has before.

 In other words, if Australia really were a planet it would be quickly, all by itself, destroying its climate. It can’t blame the destruction on others; in any moral calculation, Australia has done this to itself. Which is not to say individual Australians themselves are to blame. As elsewhere, the fossil fuel industry has done all it can to manipulate political systems: The election that brought Morrison to power saw one coal baron spend more money on campaign ads than the country’s major political parties combined. (The same coal baron, Clive Palmer, is also building a full-size working replica of the Titanic, if you like metaphor overload). And of course, the Australian political discussion is poisoned by its native son Rupert Murdoch, who owns most of the country’s newspapers and uses them to—well, you’ve seen Fox News.2

In a statement regarding Australian bushfires, the Australian Academy of Science is resolute that the response to the bushfires must extend beyond the immediate and essential need to rebuild and recover. Everything, including urban planning; building standards; habitat restoration; biodiversity and species preservation; and land, water and wildlife management will need careful and measured consideration.

 We must further improve our ability to forecast changing environmental threats and continually improve climate modelling predictions. We must improve our understanding of fire behaviour and other adverse weather events, and we must continually develop new technologies, practices and behaviours to assist our nation to respond and adapt to, manage, and mitigate against such extreme events.
All the while, Australia must take stronger action as its part of the worldwide commitment to limit global warming to 1.5° C above the long-term average to reduce the worst impacts of climate change.3

Australia unfortunately may be literally blazing the trail in the response of insurance companies, mortgage lenders, to the over production of GHG from burning coal on the planet.

References

1	(n.d.). What Australia's fires could mean for insurance and real estate .... Retrieved January 13, 2020, from https://globalnews.ca/news/6376312/australia-fires-home-insurance-mortgages-property-values/
2	(2020, January 9). What if Australia Were Its Own Planet? | The Nation. Retrieved January 13, 2020, from https://www.thenation.com/article/australia-fire-climate-change/
3	(2020, January 10). Statement regarding Australian bushfires | Australian .... Retrieved January 13, 2020, from https://www.science.org.au/news-and-events/news-and-media-releases/statement-regarding-australian-bushfires

Health effects of inequality, bootstrap individualism and high-octane opportunism

The dangers to the physical and mental health of our children and grandchildren due to the warming of the planet invite consideration of the moral issues involved in supporting further activity by industries with high GHG emissions.

Sea Level rise

Susan Ormiston & Mia Sheldon of CBC News note that there is a saying among climate scientists that "what happens in the North doesn't stay in the North," meaning big changes in this region will affect the rest of Canada as well. Mean temperatures in the Western Arctic have increased a staggering 3.4 degrees Celsius since the 1960s.

To put that in perspective, the goal of the Paris Agreement on climate change that Canada signed is to ensure global temperatures rise no more than an average of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Scientists predict that worldwide warming greater than that could trigger potentially disastrous changes to weather patterns and ocean levels.1

Investigators at the YEARS Project reveal that Exxon knew about the dangers of climate change in the 1970s, according to internal company documents.

This date agrees with the research done by Bill McKibben and published in his book “Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out?”

Rylan Higgins offers the opinion that petroleum industry jobs are only a good living if you prepare for the bust, which always comes.

 In short, it's pretty brutal, pretty unforgiving. Chews you up, spits you out.
And I'm talking about people who have devoted their entire lives to it.
It's not a surprise. The power at the top is global, immense and hell-bent on squeezing every penny out of the labour that goes into producing oil and gas. The industry has long been one based on inequality, bootstrap individualism and high-octane opportunism...And let's not forget just how opportunistic and contradictory the powerful people in the industry are. When times are good, they argue that government needs to get out of the way, that progress should not be impeded by labour or environmental regulations.
Consider, however, the fact that oil and gas are extracted on land secured from indigenous people with the help of the government.
And what about the government subsidies from which the industry benefits? When the boom ends, industry enthusiasts are quick to fault the government for not prioritizing the sector's recovery.
There are a lot of good reasons to transition away from this industry.
It will be critical to consider the workers and families in the industry as we do so. The next economic arrangement should put workers, families and the environment first — and investors and corporate bigwigs last.
In short, we'd be better off without oil and gas, and I'd bet there are plenty of workers and families who'd love an economy based on more stable, just and environmentally friendly industries....3

Sean Craig writes on a report in the Lancet that wildfires, disease, food scarcity are what scientists predict in a grim century for Canada. The Lancet Countdown global report focuses, in particular, on burdens infants and children will face in the coming decades.

Researchers determined that, as they age into adolescence, the impact of air pollution will worsen for current infants and children if current trends continue. As they enter adulthood, extreme-weather events will intensify and become more common. For example, 152 out of 196 countries saw an increase in people exposed to wildfires in the past 15 years. They said Canada is not doing enough to mitigate these potential harms.
"Canada is not on track: in 2016, total Canadian GHG emissions were 704 (metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent), an increase of more than 100 metric tons since 1990," the report reads. "Policies and measures currently under development but not yet implemented are forecast to reduce national emissions to 592 metric tons by 2030, 79 metric tons above Canada’s 2030 target... a goal which is itself too weak to represent a fair contribution by Canada to the emissions reductions necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Change Agreement."4

The planet is warming. That warming is caused by GHG emissions. Our climate scientists and health care professionals understand that there are significant consequences for our life.

Profits over the Planet

The efforts of big oil have focused mostly on profits over the planet and the health of people.

References

1	(2019, June 19). How climate change is thawing the 'glue that holds the ... - CBC. Retrieved November 13, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/the-national-permafrost-thaw-inuvik-tuktoyaktuk-1.5179842
2	(2019, August 23). War On Our Future - YouTube. Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmB1tUgTXBErWp0_RlyZPvrVAE2i0cTkN
3	(2019, November 15). 'It's pretty brutal, pretty unforgiving': Why the West should move .... Retrieved November 15, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/opinion-rylan-higgins-oil-patch-1.5358248
4	(2019, November 13). Wildfires, disease, food scarcity: scientists predict a grim century. Retrieved November 14, 2019, from https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/11/13/news/wildfires-disease-food-scarcity-scientists-predict-grim-century-canada

Political challenge to find common ground on climate

A scientist, people living along the Trans Mountain pipeline, and a social economic think tank have some opinions to share on the threats to the Canadian economy, world ecosystem, and future employment as we near the fall 2019 federal election.

Our conversion to care for the planet

Gerald Kutney, Ph.D. in chemistry, and author on climate change addresses conservative Canadians noting that Doug Ford and Andrew Scheer seem oblivious to the climate emergency threat. Canada had already responded to the issue of climate change by placing a price on carbon, endorsed by Nobel-prize-winning economist Patricia Espinosa.

The younger generation also recognizes the urgency of climate change, as witnessed by the youth movement under the hashtag #FridayForFutures, inspired by 16-year-old Swedish activist Greta Thuneberg. A student in the large turnout in Montreal, Maria Burgos, declared that: "The politicians, the older generation, they can pass this off on us. We won't stand here and do the same for our children and grandchildren."
The science of climate change, as with all science, is apolitical, by definition. Yet, climate change has become mired in a political battle royale. Conservative politicians seem oblivious to this threat or are willing to put politics ahead of people and the planet. We are but several months away from the election, and Andrew Scheer still has no plan to address climate change.1 

Anna Maria Tremonti of CBC The Current recently travelled the 1,150 km route of the Trans Mountain pipeline, to meet the people whose lives have become tangled up in the debate about its expansion. She presents a documentary that shares viewpoints from many sides of the debate. Susan Delacourt analyses the apparent “no middle ground” on this issue by identifying the short time frame of an election and what the public normally thinks is a long term timeframe for caring for the environment.

Anna Maria Tremonti recently travelled the 1,150 km route of the Trans Mountain pipeline, to meet the people whose lives have become tangled up in the debate about its expansion.The federal government is expected to make a final decision about the Trans Mountain pipeline by next Tuesday. Our national affairs panel discusses how pipeline politics, and competing climate change strategies, will be major issues in this year's federal election. In the final half hour of the program Susan Delacourt comments on no middle ground in this debate Mia Rabson notes that people are not backing the climate science because we don’t like to change what we are doing. Susan Delacourt observes that politics is short term business and environment is perceived to be a long term thing. Recent events remind us of the 11 years the IPCC has given for us to act. 2 

Brendan Haley reports that the history of the original “New Deal” teaches us that guaranteeing economic and social security can be part of a political bargain that enables the take-off of green energy technologies.

Today, green energy innovation has progressed at an impressive pace. The price of renewable energy technologies has decreased dramatically, and some predict that the cost of owning an electric car will be on par with a gasoline counterpart by 2022. Yet, politicians and vested interests are aggressively exploiting economic insecurities over jobs and affordability. The history of the original “New Deal” teaches us that guaranteeing economic and social security can be part of a political bargain that enables the take-off of green energy technologies.
However, the new “New Deal” has to devise social and economic security arrangements that fit with the green technologies we want to promote, and the insecurities faced today. This calls for imagining a new suite of social welfare initiatives that accelerate green transitions and change the political conversation.3 

In discussing, on CBC Mainstreet Nova Scotia, his new book “Falter”, a powerful and sobering call to arms, to save not only our planet but also our humanity itself, Bill McGibbon urges government to address the need to provide employment to those people who lose jobs during the transition to a low carbon emission world.

Some conservative climate principles

In the medium term, the alternate energy industry is expected to increase from the approximately 300,000 Canadians who are currently working in the field.

References

1	(2019, March 27). Dear Conservatives, Climate Change Is The Real Threat, Not A .... Retrieved June 8, 2019, from https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/gerald-kutney/conservatives-climate-change-carbon-tax_a_23696033/
2	(2019, June 12). The Current for June 12, 2019 | CBC Radio - CBC.ca. Retrieved June 12, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-june-12-2019-1.5171049
3	(2019, June 11). Blog | Broadbent Institute. Retrieved June 12, 2019, from https://www.broadbentinstitute.ca/blog