Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to Guardian writer Peter Sutoris, we need to rediscover the ecological connectedness of indigenous peoples, although we may have to keep some of our tech toys.
The climate crisis requires a new culture and politics, not just new technologies
Peter Sutoris
Mon 24 May 2021 9 p.m. AEST
This moment requires humility – we cannot innovate out of this chaos
We are experiencing what scientists call the Anthropocene, a new geological age in which humans have become the dominant force that shapes the natural environment. Many scholars date this new period to the economic boom after the Second World War, the “great acceleration”. This rapid increase in our control over the earth has brought us to the abyss of catastrophic climate change, triggered mass extinction, disrupted the nitrogen cycles of our planet and acidified its oceans, among other things.
Our society has come to believe that technology is the solution. Electricity from renewable sources, energy efficient buildings, electric vehicles and hydrogen fuels are among the many innovations that we hope will play a crucial role in reducing emissions. Most current models for climate change assume a certain degree of “negative emissions” in the future and rely on large-scale technology for carbon capture, although this is still a long way from being ready for use. And when all else fails, we can geoengineer the earth.
…
Our civilization is underpinned by extractivism, the belief that we can exploit the earth, and the nonsensical idea of infinite growth within finite territory. Material possessions as performance indicators, an urge to consume and the blindness to the long-term consequences of our actions have become part of the culture of global capitalism. But there is nothing self-evident about these things, as indigenous peoples teach us.
Many indigenous groups got to know their natural environment very well and lasted for millennia, often despite harsh conditions. They saw the limits of what these environments could support and understood that caring for the environment was also an act of self-care. Pacific islanders would designate restricted areas of the ocean to avoid overfishing, while high altitude farmers in the Andes would rely on terraces that reduce erosion to grow their crops. It is no accident that up to 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity is found in areas where indigenous peoples live.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/24/climate-change-crisis-culture-politics-technology
In my opinion, it is nonsense to say that society is reviving the indigenous lifestyle. I have no problem with people who choose to live like this. But most of us enjoy our comfort.
Most people in advanced countries, even people whose ancestors lived indigenous lifestyles, live modern lifestyles of their own free will.
Authors like Peter Sutoris speak the conversation, but I suspect he is typing on a computer that contains lots of plastic and refined metal, lives in a warm, waterproof, and comfortable house, has a nice place to sleep, and has a freezer crammed full of groceries, of those at least some of them did not have to hunt or grow.
The idea of ending “speciesism” and ending the prioritization of human well-being may sound nice and fluffy, but a serious attempt to downgrade human well-being as a priority would almost certainly have dire consequences. You don’t have to look far back in history to find periods of terrible suffering like Mao’s great leap forward or periods of severe famine in the early Soviet era, all caused by governments focusing on priorities other than caring for their people.
Like this:
Loading…
Comments are closed.