Mirko Bagaric published an excellent article in The Australian that is worth mentioning here. The article tries to draw attention to the hypocrisy of western concerns over future global warming disasters, while ignoring the extreme misery and suffering being endured right now in developing countries.

HOW worried do you reckon people in developing nations -- who are dying from hunger and other causes at the rate of 30,000 a day -- are about global warming? It seems like a stupid question because the answer is so obvious. But the answer is all important. It demonstrates why the supposed No.1 ethical concern of our generation (global warming) is in the main misguided self-interest dressed up as a moral crusade.

Hundreds of millions of people are already living in environmental conditions that are far worse than anything that will occur as a result of greenhouse warming, even according to the grimmest projections by green groups.

And our response? As a nation, we are now obsessed with fussing about speculative future harm while failing to come anywhere close to meeting the international benchmark of donating 0.7 per cent of gross national income to the developing world.

This gross distortion in our ethical priorities is so acute that it can't simply be explained as a judgment problem, something that will be corrected as we become more enlightened. It goes deeper than that.... - The Australian

I would highly recommend you read the rest of Mirko's article, but perhaps the most striking sentence is this:

In the 90 seconds that it took you to read this article, 30 of them have died. In the same time, the sea level hasn't risen a millimetre. - The Australian

I must say I fully agree with most of what Mirko expresses. If my plugging away at this keyboard was only for the benefit of the smallest, wealthiest portion of our ailing planet's population, I think I'd pack it away and go do something else. What keeps me here, for the moment, is the realisation that the foundational solutions to global warming also happen to be the solutions to many of the problems in the South. Or, put another way - the same systems of mismanagement that have brought about global warming, are also the main contributors to poverty and inequality.

The 'systems' we in the North have 'trialled' over the last 100+ years have brought global warming upon us. And, although they have failed, the scary thing is these systems (energy inefficient and unsustainable large-scale centralised agricultural and livestock systems, enormous globalised transport systems, food swaps, etc.), are being increasingly transferred to the South! It's like ignoring a manufacturer's recall of a toy with known 'safety issues', and selling it instead - to a poor, and trusting younger cousin.

The president of Nabisco once defined the goal of economic globalization as “a world of homogeneous consumption”, in which people everywhere eat the same food, wear the same clothing and live in houses built from the same materials. It is a world in which every society employs the same technologies, depends on the same centrally managed economy, offers the same Western education for its children, speaks the same language, consumes the same media images, holds the same values, and even thinks the same thoughts: monoculture.

Through conquest, colonialism and western ‘development’, much of the world’s diversity has already been destroyed. Economic globalization accelerates this process. Wherever you go in today’s ‘global village’ you’ll find multi-lane highways, concrete cities, and a cultural landscape featuring grey business suits, fast food chains, Hollywood films, and cellular phones. In every corner of the planet, Barbie and Madonna are familiar icons, and the Marlboro Man and Rambo define the male ideal. From Cleveland to Cairo to Caracas, Baywatch is entertainment and CNN is news.

Although this sameness suits the needs of TNCs — which benefit from the efficiencies of standardized production and standardized consumption — in the long term a homogenized planet is disastrous for all of us. It is leading to a breakdown of both biological and cultural diversity, erosion of our food security, an increase in conflict and violence, and devastation for the global biosphere. - Breaking Up the Monoculture

With an enormous rolling pin and cookie cutter - we're rolling out diverse cultures and applying our modern monoculture in a Mickey Mouse shaped form.

I'm not aware of the details of the 0.7 per cent that Mirko advocates being given as aid to the developing world, and in what form he believes that aid should arrive - but if we can 'aid' these countries, doesn't it need to be according to regional needs and incorporate local knowledge? If we are to really aid them, it's going to be important to sift through our offerings, and ensure we don't give them a wooden nickel.

Being wealthy in goods is obviously not something to be proud of in itself. Our wealth has come through the plundering of the land we depend on for survival - and not just our own land. We have been sawing away at the branch we're sitting on. As such, a little more respect for the few nations around the world that are still self-sufficient and sustainable today would be in order. For this reason, I dislike using the terms 'developing' and 'developed', as the so-called 'developed' world has certainly not arrived. As such, it's important to quit projecting the idea that our way of life is the better one, the one to strive for. We cannot afford to aid other nations to pattern themselves after us!

A deep understanding of sustainability issues should have been a central theme of our educational systems - the real ABCs, if you like - as it is/was in many native cultures. But, instead, that cookie cutter stamped its impression on us in school too - making short-term economics and comfortable retirements priority instead.

Shouldn't this humble us? Where have been our priorities?

 

Highly Recommend Further Reading:

• Hunger and the Globalized System of Trade and Food Production