According to Bloomberg, 11,000 scientists from 40 countries have banded together to call for solutions to the climate problem. These scientists declare that Planet Earth is facing a real climate emergency. And it’s all down to fossil fuels, cows, greenhouse gases and just too many people.
Diverse media channels have broadcast their own views on this. The BBC and the Guardian are clear that anthropogenic activity is to blame. But for ZeroHedge it’s a question of population control. Their headline, ‘Final Solution to Global Warming: Just Kill Billions of People’, reflects their usual tasteless rhetoric, but is perhaps in this case chillingly accurate. The more people, the more consumption and demand and pollution (which, by the by, is not the same as climate change/global warming). What these scientists are telling us is that Western lifestyles and consumerism are destroying the planet. So everybody (not just the indulgent West) will have to tighten their belts. As Bloomberg states:
‘From meat consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and ice loss to sea level rise and extreme weather events, they lay out a grim portrait of 40 years of squandered opportunities. The scientists make specific calls for policy-makers to quickly implement systemic change to energy, food and economic policies. But they go one step further – into the politically fraught territory of population control. “It must be stabilized – and ideally gradually reduced – within a framework that ensures social integrity”.’
I fear that none of this will go down too well in India, China, South America or Africa, where they also have their ambitions for Western-style development.
The scientists quote the rising tide of official concern – governmental climate emergency declarations, striking schoolchildren, ecocide lawsuits, and grassroots demands for change. I wonder if they really know what this change would mean: supermarkets banned from selling meat, no fossil-fuel-driven transport, switching off the electricity. Especially for social media, so heavily reliant on the vast server farms warming up the Arctic. And all those rare metals needed for electric car batteries . . .
Ironically, the West has already made progress on one of the 11,000’s recommendations: ‘Have fewer children’. Should we celebrate? It seems not, because governments are worried about the effect on GDP and tax receipts. So they are hell-bent on importing lots of new residents, who will probably reproduce at a much higher rate.
Who should we be listening to? I am doubtful that Western populations will be glad to give up all the benefits they take for granted and have enjoyed from industrialisation and the recent technological revolution, and ludicrously expect the Third World to decide they’re also better off without it all. Perhaps the global solution should be universal ration books. After all, during the war people ate lots of turnips and adopted a make-do-and-mend lifestyle. No petrol either. The population was much healthier. But I also remember the day sweetie rationing was stopped. People went mad . . .
The real problem with ration books is the same as the Western world imposing its virtue-signalling on the Third World. Everybody would have to do without, except the racketeers, the black market, the elites. While wartime housewives had to make Christmas puddings from potatoes, others could still dine on caviar in the Ritz. It won’t be any different this time round.
Perhaps we should listen to the other Corbyn, big brother Piers. He’s having none of this Extinction Rebellion stuff. It’s all a Soros-funded, EU- and UN-backed scam to transfer money from ordinary people to corporations. This Corbyn, a physicist, weather forecaster and former Labour councillor, warns that ‘climate policy is there to control you, not climate’.
He believes that the purpose of the ‘climate crisis’ is to ‘shake down ordinary taxpayers to give huge amounts of money to large corporations to build wind farms . . . The UN talks about redistribution of wealth, but it’s redistribution upwards. The development of the Third World is being held back by Western climate policy. And all this comes from the same source: globalist mega-corporation world domination.’
But for all that, the scientists’ recommendations are certainly worthy – less pollution, less indulgence. To a Scottish Presbyterian, that’s definitely something to aim for, though I doubt if it will make much difference to the climate. I just don’t see it going down too well at the ballot box here in the West, or in the ambitious Third World.