One philosophical question that always crops up on my mind is: can you ‘rate’ pain? Although, I am still not convinced either way, I do think that it’s fair to say that if you’re dead, nothing else matters, and therefore, we can say that the right to life is an important and supreme one.
In the context of political issues, I ask myself, should we rate political issues with importance? I have arrived at the conclusion that, yes, of course we should and we should judge importance as being based on the severity of the human suffering involved.
Climate change
In June I wrote the following:
I’m ‘progressive’, but not so much so that I think huge global temperatures changes are acceptable. Nothing is more essential than the world around us. The environment capacitates the fundamentals of life.
I stand by this.
We are told that about 4 billion people out of the current world population of about 7 billion will die as a result of the climate catastrophe that we are en-route to. The truth is that the surviving 3 billion will mainly be the rich in the West, I would like to add.
If we judge the severity of the issue of climate change in terms of potential human suffering that is due to arise, it does seems that climate change is the ultimate issue of our time - for the 4 billion people who would pay with their life, death would be the ultimate affliction.
Reality
I am not advocating that we forget all other issues and focus on climate change solely, of course. However, I believe that climate change simply isn’t on the agenda enough (in government and in the media) as it should be. For instance, regularly the mainstream media subordinates climate change stories to what newspapers editors clearly think are more important issues - these issues can range from ‘celebrity bullshit’ to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. 60% of articles in mainstream media newspapers are brought into existence as a result of government’s actions - press releases, public announcements, chamber debate, and Westminster rumours.
But I ask you…
What of foreign policy in a world where more than half of the population have been killed? What of human rights? What of transport and education? What of gay rights, women’s rights, minorities’ rights in a world where 4 billion people have vanished?
It seems to me that these issues would be dwarfed in comparison to the catastrophe that would have shaken humanity if we continue on our current course.
