Global warming takes down its first major political victim:
Conservative Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat Saturday at the hands of the left-leaning opposition, whose leader has promised to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.
Why the stunning loss? A key reason was Howard's "head in the sand dust" response to the country's brutal once-in-a-thousand year drought. As the UK's Independent reported in April:
... few scientists dispute the part played by climate change, which is making Australia hotter and drier ... Until a few months ago, Mr Howard and his ministers pooh-poohed the climate-change doomsayers.
You can read about Howard's lame attempt to change his position rhetoric on global warming here.
Now we are the last industrialized nation with a leader who refuses to take any serious action. Hopefully that dubious distinction will be corrected in next year's presidential election.
For Australians, the drought, called "the first climate change-driven disaster to strike a developed nation," was enough to change their views on global warming dramatically. Of course, Katrina could have been the first -- but we have no way of knowing for certain if climate change caused that hurricane to become so deadly. Let's hope we don't need to suffer anything as brutal as what Australia is going through before we commit to serious action.
This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
How industry pressures and competing national agendas dim prospects for a climate treaty
Activists launch climate hunger strike
Comments
View as Flat
ThomC Posted 7:45 am
24 Nov 2007
Permalink
naught101 Posted 9:15 am
24 Nov 2007
check out http://www.envirowiki.info, the knowledge database for environmentalists and activists.
Permalink
Steve Bloom Posted 10:25 am
24 Nov 2007
Permalink
stringy Posted 12:52 pm
24 Nov 2007
But Howard had it coming - he was completely unable to deal with the realities of the 21st century.
Permalink
Des Emery Posted 1:44 pm
24 Nov 2007
One picture showed Harper sitting alone and impatiently checking his wrist watch. One can only hope (or entertain 'aspirational goals') that his time is indeed limited as Prime Minister.
Des Emery
Permalink
Ian Milliss Posted 1:55 pm
24 Nov 2007
You could say that the Australian Greens now have the policies of the old (centre left) Labor Party, the Labor Party now has the policies of the old (centre right) Liberal Party and Howard's Liberal Party has the policies of the old corporatist Italian Fascist Party.
Although it's great Howard is gone, the clean coal delusion still grips the Labor Party.
The best thing about the election is that in most of Labor's landslide seats their vote was little better than the Liberals vote. It was the additional 5-20% of Green preferences that delivered Labor the seats leaving them very much in debt to the Greens. Whether they'll repay that debt is a moot point.
Ian Milliss
Permalink
Sam Wells Posted 2:22 am
25 Nov 2007
And it could be that Australia could join onto Kyoto reduction goals and STILL continue exporting coal and iron at higher and higher levels.
And let's be honest here, the dust clouds over Australia might be more of a cause (and effect) of the drought than global warming. Heavy dust plumes tend to suppress precipitation.
Onward through the fog
Permalink
stevenearlsalmony Posted 3:49 am
25 Nov 2007
Who knows, raising awareness of our brothers and sisters that results in political and economic support for addressing the challenges posed by global warming could soon lead us to point when advocacy of climate change legislation becomes a "litmus test" for politicians who run for election to public office.
An article of uncommon value from a colleague of mine in the field of psychology seeks to raise awareness, too. I would like to share it with you.
http://www.energybulletin.net/37091.html
Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:44 am
25 Nov 2007
Some comments:
Religion-based opposition to any kind of climate-change mitigation includes the attitude of many fundamentalist/evangelical Christians, who look forward to the imminent end of the world, and consider it unnecessary, or even irreligious and disobedient, to do anything on behalf of the environment.
The etymology of the name of Voltaire's character, "Pangloss," is purely Greek. "Gloss" is from "glossa," "tongue," from which comes this series of derivations: a language; a foreign language; a word in a foreign language requiring explanation; anything requiring explanation; an explanation. So "Pangloss" should be understood to mean, "one who has an explanation for everything."
McMahon's conceptual use of Pangloss is fine. But she should be clear that his philosophical attitude in "Candide," "ours is the best of all possible worlds," is a parody of the metaphysics of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz; and that metaphysics, so far from reflecting an irrational disposition, is based on serious, sophisticated argumentation.
"Candide" was written in part as a reaction to the catastrophic earthquake and tsunami which destroyed Lisbon, one of the great capitals of Europe, as well as much of the Portuguese coast, and permanently knocked Portugal out of the company of principal powerful players in international affairs. A psychologist might be prompted to ask, "What kind of wisdom do natural disasters, such as the Lisbon earthquake, Hurricane Katrina, and the great Australian drought, actually teach us?"
On the Australian election: Of course, John Howard was also a stalwart ally -- who did not obviously need to be as "puppetish" as Sammie suggests -- of George W. Bush in the Bushies' "global war on terror," and that alliance has been increasingly unpopular in Australia. But it is encouraging that Howard was also punished for his GW-denialism.
(And yes, Des, I too was wondering why Joseph chose to pass over Stephen Harper.)
I personally would be interested to know how much the Australian electorate's attitudes on global warming have been affected by the terrific destruction of many of Australia's most charismatic wildlife, especially kangaroos, wallabies and koalas, in the drought-related fires of the past couple of years. The eucalyptus trees are said to catch fire so quickly that few animals have time to escape.
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
undyau Posted 8:04 am
25 Nov 2007
No water for sports fields; no water for the garden; diminished food crops; the cost of building desalination plants; the possible destruction of the Barrier Reef and the loss of beach-side property probably figure higher in most people's conscience than wild-life loss.
Bush-fires are a regular feature of the Australian summer - the increase in frequency and intensity is an incremental change and if people do worry about it, they worry most about their family and/or house being burnt.
With John Howard stepping down as leader of his party and his former deputy quitting, its possible that someone who has a real handle on the dangers posed by climate change could become the leader of the opposition. Or we they could go for another chump.
Balance of power in the senate is still up for grabs, the number crunching will take a while - the Greens will be part of the deal, but there may be others involved.
Andy
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:20 am
25 Nov 2007
Anyway, Australians have been in the forefront in opposing Japanese whaling ambitions, so in that regard at least they (you!) count as heroic animal-friends.
Have the Steve Irwin circle got at all political, by the way?
On another GW-related matter: As sealevels rise and island-nations such as Tuvalu and Vanuatu get submerged, is it understood that their populations will likely be relocated to Australia (or New Zealand)? And has that entered political discourse yet?
Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
Ian Milliss Posted 8:33 am
25 Nov 2007
Voltaire actually had the answer as well, in the last line of the book Cela est bien dit, répondit Candide, mais il faut cultiver notre jardin (loosely translates as thats all well and good but we should first look after our own garden) meaning that we should get on with it and at least deal with the things that are within our immediate control.
caniscandida, burned wildlife makes for tragic TV imagery but it has no effect on Australian opinion whatsoever, the Australian ecology was created by aboriginal fire farming, fires are an annual feature of Australian life. Unfortunately in recent years the fires have become much worse but mostly because of misguided attempts to stop fires entirely when a regime of regular cool burns more effectively reduces the incidence of major fires. Koalas have definitely suffered but kangaroos and wallabies continue to exist in almost plague proportions in some areas. (Don't get me wrong, I love them but here they are like squirrels in the US, not all that noteworthy, they hop in and graze my lawn every night)
The biggest opinion changer is the drought that has gone on for so long that people are realising it's not a drought, it's the climate now, and in the future the occasional wet year will be the exception rather than the occasional drought year. Most eastern state cities now live with serious restrictions on water use, so even the most urban are effected by it.
Ian Milliss
Permalink
geopology Posted 4:15 pm
25 Nov 2007
My point being that climate change is very much a main stream issue here that is not owned by the left - even people on the right have claimed we should have signed Kyoto long ago.
The pressure on political parties to get serious about climate change leading up to this election came from all parts of our society. There were some very well organised campaigns by grass roots movements, NGO's, religious groups, independent think tanks and of course the Green Party. We even had a party called the Climate Change Coalition, which was headed by a high profile scientist, running purely with the intention of getting strong climate change policies passed.
The Howard government paid the price for not heeding their calls. I think the USA can be encouraged by our success.
Here is a short list of some of the campaigns and groups that pushed for a change on climate change
NGO's
Australian conservation foundation
WWF
The Big Switch
Green Peace
Conservation councils of Australia
Climate Action Network Australia
Independent Think Tanks
The Climate Institute
Grass Roots
Get Up
Clean energy for eternity
Numerous local climate action groups
The Australian Youth Climate Coalition
Rising Tide
Religious
Project Green Church
Social Action Alliance
Queensland Sustainable Energy
Green Cathedral Project
Common Belief
Angligreen
Al ghazzali
Catholic Earth Care
JECO
Sisters of the Good Samaritan
Anglican Communion Environmental Network
Earth Ministries
Faith Ecology Network
Actually Australia owes Grist some thanks. After perusing your list of 15 greenest religious leaders The Climate Institute decided to bring Rev Sally Bingham out to Australia to help galvanize the religious response to climate change. It was a very successful tour and received a lot of good media coverage. She has inspired us to set up an Australian version of her Interfaith Power and Light.
Here's hoping that concerned citizens of the USA are greatly encouraged by what has happened here in Australia and that they feel emboldened to push for change in 08 with even greater zeal.
Take care,
Geopology
Permalink
trock Posted 8:06 pm
25 Nov 2007
Permalink