February 1, 2009

We let the current generations die ...

Twenty seven thousand children under the age of five die every single day, children living in poverty, dead from easily and cheaply avoidable causes, such as the lack of a clean cup of water.

How much time and money did you devote to saving any of those lives today?

None?

How much time and money are you prepared to sacrifice to save some hypothetical lives 100 years or 1000 years from now?

Oh, a lot?

Trillions of dollars?

An oodle of personal sacrifice?

You're sick to the stomach with worry over CO2s (don't forget methane kiddies, it's very nasty stuff; why does everyone always forget the methane gases?) and want Rudd, Obama, Brown and all the coloured people inhabiting those other big continents to sacrifice today, tomorrow and the next dozen decades on the human conceit of of "reversing" Earth's climate?

Good for you!

Take a number, join the queue!

I'll join you too, just as soon as you show me that you're clever enough to change the weather.

See, I'm figureing if you can't find a way to change the weather, make it rain, for example, I'll have little faith in your ability to deliberately change ("reverse") the climate.

I'll join you too, just as soon as you show me that your motives are real and pure and that you care about the tens of millions of avoidable deaths occurring every year, in your life time, right here and now.

Save those lives, then maybe I'll believe that your environmental motives really are about saving future lives, and not yet another faddish human vanity, eco-evangelicalism for the middle-class, a cheap salve on the wormy little conscious of the inhabitants of first world countries.

For more than fifty years human kind has denied nearly three billion people the basics to maintain life and health, but we've all a flutter about a few million who might lose their homes from rising sea waters in fifty years - might - and vain enough to believe that some paltry (yet very expensive and economically distorting) actions we take today are sufficiently self-sacrificing that those future lives really will be saved (well, they could just more inland, you know, how hard could it be to 'save' them, really?).

Yet we won't give the genuinely paltry amount needed to provide basic food, water, shelter and medicine to all who inhabit the earth today.

We never have, we never will
.

More and more, I am perplexed by the unethical, almost sinister, actions of we humans.



11 comments:

  1. That's a brilliant post Caz.

    I'm still cheering and clapping!!!!

    It sums up my sentiments in a nutshell.

    Why devote such time to something that might never be, when there are so many people who need and deserve our help right now!

    We can make a genuine difference today.

    It's our duty as fellow human beings.

    Enough of this hand wringing about the future.

    It ain't set in stone.

    Time to act is right now!

    ReplyDelete
  2. "For more than fifty years human kind has denied nearly three billion people the basics to maintain life and health, but we've all a flutter about a few million who might lose their homes from rising sea waters in fifty years - might - and vain enough to believe that some paltry (yet very expensive and economically distorting) actions we take today are sufficiently self-sacrificing that those future lives really will be saved (well, they could just more inland, you know, how hard could it be to 'save' them, really?)."

    Oh selfish, self centred, cruel world..

    Really, I just feel like crying buckets Caz...

    ReplyDelete
  3. As would be obvious Kath, I have creeping suspicions when the whole of humanity gets all weepy about the thought of lots of coffee coloured people losing their thatched huts from rising sea waters fifty years from now, but don't mind if the predecessors of those coffee coloured people die today from lack of hygienic living conditions and food.

    Oh, that's right: in 50 years those folks might want to come and live with us, on our un-flooded shores. Ah, I see. Well, that's bloody frightening, isn't it, must do something - anything!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous9:00 AM

    Caz, for PM - and sooner the better for all of us. And much more lovelier.

    Well said, we needed to hear that. Should be in the big papers - but they'd be toooo gutless.

    BTW, as much as I love and associate with the number 27, in this instance I withdraw my support for said number.

    JO

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey Justin two great minds think alike! I was thinking the same thing about Caz's piece being in the paper.

    Caz, submit this piece to the Oz. I for one am confident that it will be published.

    You've got nothing to lose.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous1:23 PM

    Yeah, Kath darling, go for it Caz.

    JO

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ouch!

    Somehow I fell flagellated.

    Neatly written though.

    Write another: I feel the need to be f;agellated again. Oh, I see, you have written another...

    ReplyDelete
  8. How does one fell flagellated? Feel you idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous6:14 PM

    "Fell flagellated", I thought you had it right the first time dear Father - it's easy really. But I'm not gunna tell ya how one does it.

    JO

    ReplyDelete
  10. Indeed, I saw no error in fell flagellate either. Fell? Feel? but worked for me.

    Every now and then, maybe one in a hundred published letters to newspapers see the appearance of rational thought, whether about the environment, the economy, climate change, government, terrorism, and so on. Tiny blips, printed and forgotten. The papers continue on, breathlessly, toeing the politically / environmentally popular lines, which, thanks to globalization, come from the same hymn book being used by the MSM and pollies the world over.

    Who would have thought even as little as five years ago that the world would succumb to "consensus" science?

    Or that Al Gore and a PowerPoint pack would doom tens of millions of current refugees all for the sake of some hypothetical refugees of some many generations hence?

    And on it goes.

    Until someone comes up with a PowerPoint pack to knock everyone in the world back to their senses, any other thoughts are less than a pin prick, less than a grain of sand on the collective beaches of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Don't underestimate yourself Caz.

    If you don't try you'll never know.

    Besides, what you so eloquently say makes a lot of bloody sense?

    "any other thoughts are less than a pin prick, less than a grain of sand on the collective beaches of the world."

    I am not so sure Caz. Your piece may just prick a few deadened conscience's eh?

    Reckon it's worth a try.

    ReplyDelete