Don't mention the poor

We may be managing to virtually ignore climate change; but the poor will always be with us. Even if we are Australian-centric, even if we ignore terrible suffering in Africa ,and Asia and the Middle East, there they sit on the streets of Melbourne: the ubiquitous centuries old beggars.

They lurk in the shadows of the loveless prosperity of the passers by, and offer up their misery in an empty polystyrene cup. Do we say there but for the grace of god or good fortune go I and toss them a coin? Mostly we say thank god it's you not me. In that way we are grateful for their testimony. Like dutiful detached mourners at a funeral for someone we have barely known, we rarely ask for whom the bell tolls.

We may clean them from city street, when guests are expected for grand celebrations and festivities in the city, but mostly they serve a function. They are the modern scapegoats

In Ancient Greece these were the beggars cripples or petty criminals literally cast out in times of plague or disaster to appease the gods, who may then go easier on the more worthy citizens.

In ancient Hebrew times it was an actual goat cast out into the wilderness upon the Day of Atonement.

We have the modern incarnation in targeted groups such as asylum seekers. But the former third world has long been the scapegoat of wealthy nations. We are changing but how profoundly?

How lastingly or deeply moved are we in the west, by the suffering of the Bangladeshi factory workers? Paid a pittance, they have lost their lives to supply wealthy consumers with cheap garments, and now they lie buried beneath the rubble of their sub standard factory workplace? Some of us may sign a petition, or boycott certain vilified brands, but after a while…..

The news of the occasional miraculous rescue, amid the horror and buried bodies, dies down. The media switches off and we go back to watching distracting television. En masse humanity can be very callow.

Perhaps it is only when we feel directly impacted by suffering or need, that we are likely to be really engaged. Until then we may operate passively in what Stanley Cohen describes in his book as States of Denial.

When we see truly hear and know another's pain empathy can kick in. This may be because our evolutionary biology is connected to our capacity to attach to the herd, and is designed to arouse care for those in our immediate family and community, when they cry for help or show distress. This is an ancient embedded survival strategy that has taken on many forms, though not all good, throughout civilisation including war, trade, codes and laws.

Like the fight and flight response it is another central survival drive. We will fight to save ourselves, and those on whom we depend; or we will flee. The problem in our globally interdependent world is as poet John Donne wrote in the 17^th Century, "no man is an island" We are now unequivocally bound to the entirety of animals, plants and people and the planet. If the ecosystems collapse we cannot sustain life. Certainly not as we now know it.

So when trees fall in Indonesia it reverberates throughout our entire world. Yet Australia has reneged on a promised $75 million for forest regrowth in undeveloped countries. This would have benefited us all.

Many scientists such as esteemed climate scientist James Hansen, formerly of NASA, and moral philosophers such as Clive Hamilton warn us that we are heading for climate chaos and an unrecognisable world if we don't drastically cut emissions

We stand to lose everything by the end of the century says Rod Quantock our most active Aussie comedian, who maintains that global warming is no joke, in his 'climate change explained in a frenzy' show.

This does not mean that we will live high on the hog until 2,100 and suddenly lose it all like a gambler in a casino. It actually means that by centuries end, millions will probably have perished as the angered climate becomes enraged.

I'm not a theist but global warming brings an apocalyptic promise of flood, fire, famine, and pestilence in abundance. That would be so bad for business as usual, and cut our emissions wouldn't it? But as they say in the best good cop bad cop tradition, we can do this the hard way or the harder way or the impossible way.

After widely reading the reports and science, here are the cold hard facts as I understand them. The atmosphere impacts on every living thing on the planet. Carbon dioxide levels are now at 400 parts per million. This is the highest it has been for almost 3 million years. The greenhouse effect has been known for decades. Until Industrialisation the CO2 in the Earth's 'atmospheric blanket' has been at just the right temperature for human life to thrive. It kept us cosy, within a range, so to speak but not overheated.

Our planetary environment has evolved, (much more gradually than the recent warming), into systems that rely on the stability of the earth's temperature leading to relative endurance and predictability of its climate. Cropping relies on predictable rain patterns and temperature ranges. Australia notoriously has been a land of droughts and flooding. However, now at even 1 degree of warming, we are already far beyond the normal variation in extreme weather.

But I fear that I must mention the poor again. Not in order to shake a moral stick at the carbon emitters of the industrialised nations, although it is warranted. I am concerned that emphasising how the poorer nations, particularly the poorest of those nations, will suffer first and most with climate change, falsely soothes and lulls those of us who could stem the tide.

What a relief if the poor, as usual take the rap, play the scapegoat and suffer the ravages of global warming. Like the canary in the mine they will go first, but here is the terrible truth, we all lemming like will accompany them sooner or later.

The recent climate disasters of Australia and The USA are making this very clear. The UN emphasises the responsibility of wealthy nations to repair the damage wrought by their profligate consumption addiction. But this may only reassure us that we are at the top and may be spared.

A recent UN report states that up to 3 billions who barely leave a footprint, may be thrust into extreme poverty, [code for starvation ?] by 2050. The UN has emphasised how imperilled the poorer nations are by unmitigated climate change. That's if we don't act.

Natural disasters displaced 32.4 million people in 2012. While most of these came from what we term developing nations and used to be called the third world, almost 800,000 people were displaced in the US.

The wealthy have always preyed upon the desperation of the poor or created that very desperation, through slavery, colonisation and now in its modern manifestations of exploitation of their lands its resources and their bodies.

The rich mining magnates like the Koch Brothers in the US and our own Gina Reinhart must feel grandiosely insulated by their billions as they massively fund climate denial in order to block global warming mitigation - presumably, in order, to continue being billionaires and at the top.

They exhibit most blatantly the "It can't happen to me syndrome", for they are above the travails of the masses. They believe that they are rich enough to buy governments and the earth.

But in the final reckoning everyone loses.

So it's not just about the poor, although right now this is massively important, it's the planet stupid.

We are not ultimately safe against the impact of global warming, in our air conditioned homes with running water and stocked supermarkets. All of us can begin right now, to not sit idly by while others suffer.

The first step in any change is facing the truth, learning as much as is possible about the problem, finding the solutions and implementing the solutions. The irony is that we know what the problem is, and we also already know that there are many solutions: Our biggest stumbling block is our refusal to face the truth and therefore to act.