ON MAN, ON NATURE, ON HUMAN LIFE, MUSING IN SOLITUDE
On 30 Sep 2023, at 06:16, John C., a long term kayaking buddy, wrote:
“John,
For your possible interest: here is something I originally published in the MCC Newsletter back in 1972, then republished (and added to) in 2001. Note, when the original article was first published, the world's population was 3.5bn, but now it's well over 8bn.
Best. John C.
______________________________________________________________________________
My email reply to John…
Hi John, I’ve taken your original article and have added to it. Not by any intellectual means. I wouldn’t be so audacious. More of a ‘stating of the obvious’ means.
You wrote as follows…
“I believe that mankind is well aware of the fact that there is a delicate equilibrium of physical and bio-logical phenomena on and around earth which cannot be thoughtlessly disturbed as we race along the road of technological development … This global concern in the face of a grave common danger, which carries the seeds of extinction for the human species, may well prove to be the elusive force which can bind men together. The battle for human survival can only be won by all nations joining together in a concerted drive to preserve life on this planet."
The Message is clear. It describes the issues in terms of causes: viz:
Environmental deterioration
Depletion of natural resources
Population overcrowding
Food distribution
War
So, what’s to be done?
Some will say we must have more research.
This, in my opinion, will not buy us more time but simply speed the whole devastating process of our - almost - total elimination, or as some have labelled, it, our ‘Extinction.’
Who shouts from the back, “this is no more than we deserve?”
I don’t believe we deserve any retribution. We’re all innocents. I believe that we’re, as a species, work in progress.
The problem is that, long before we’ve got anywhere close to securing our long term and therefore equitable future, we’ll have vanished from the face of the Earth, leaving no traces other than the exception of the evidence of us having been here, just as has the prehistoric mammals.
None the less we cannot afford to sit on our hands.
The best we must hope for is…
•A moratorium on technological innovations the effects of which we cannot foretell and which are not essential to human survival. This would include new weapons systems, luxury transport, new and untested pesticides, the manufacture of new plastics, the establishment of vast new nuclear power projects, etc. It would also include ecologically unresearched engineering projects – the damming of great rivers, "reclamation" of jungle land, undersea mining projects etc.
•The application of existing pollution-control technology to the generation of energy and to industry generally, large scale recycling of materials in order to slow down the exhaustion of resources, and the rapid establishment of international agreements on environmental quality, subject to review as environmental needs become more fully known.
•The application of existing pollution-control technology to the generation of energy and to industry generally, large scale recycling of materials in order to slow down the exhaustion of resources, and the rapid establishment of international agreements on environmental quality, subject to review as environmental needs become more fully known.
•Intensified programmes in all regions of the world to curb population growth, with full regard for the necessity of accomplishing this without abrogation of civil rights. It is important that these programmes should be accompanied by a decrease in the level of consumption by privileged classes, and that a more equitable distribution of food and other goods among all people be developed.
•Regardless of the difficulty of achieving agreements, nations must find a way to abolish war, to defuse their nuclear armaments, and to destroy their chemical and biological weapons. The consequences of a global war would be immediate and irreversible, and it is therefore also the responsibility of individuals and groups to refuse to participate in research or processes that might, if used, result in the extermination of the human species.
•Earth, which has seemed so large, must now be seen in its smallness. We live in a closed system, absolutely dependent on Earth and on each other for our lives and those of succeeding generations. The many things that divide us are therefore of infinitely less importance than the interdependence and danger that unites us.
•We believe that it is literally true that only by transcending our divisions will men be able to keep Earth as their home. Solutions to the actual problems of pollution, hunger, over-population and war may be simpler to find than the formula for the common effort through which the search for solutions must occur, but we must make a beginning.'
If our environment is to be preserved, sociologists, scientists, economists and each member of the public will have to spend a little more time, like Wordsworth, "On Man, on Nature, on Human Life, Musing in Solitude."
Or, to put it another way, ''
Owing to lack of interest, tomorrow has been cancelled.
___________________________________________________________________________
Written on the 30th. September, 2023. I replied…
Hi John.
Your timing in bringing this to my attention is disappointing.
Why?
Because it’s too late.
In your defence, (not that I’m lining up an attack. The very opposite is the case.)… I’m aware you re-published this in the latter part of the last Century.
And of course, John, I’m not accusing you nor anyone else of mal-performance.
Why?
Because we’re all responsible; everyone one of us. And for this reason alone, nobody is responsible. We might line up politicians, scientists, etc. but I’m convinced that, short of taking the world along with us, nothing would have changed. A world dictatorship! God! We can’t agree on most crucial aspects that threaten us. Take trade, land borders, religion, human behaviour, etc.
Here is a prime example (amongst many others) of just one aspect of serious environmental degradation, that of water pollution, which has to be of particular interest to everyone of us. The answer is to first determine its priority in the scheme of things. (I T S O T)
Having determined this we then need to spend money, taxes, borrowed or stolen cash. It matters not I T S O T from where we get the funds. If it’s a case of neighbours against neighbours or nations against nations, so be it.
Should we collectively decide to act NOW, according to our scientific experts (and pl don’t knock ‘expert's’; (for decades they’ve being trying to tell us we’re all in deep poops and should have spent vastly more than our current budgets.
Here I endeth the last lesson by quoting from you, John,.
“If our environment is to be preserved, sociologists, scientists, economists and each member of the public will have to spend a little more time, like Wordsworth, "On Man, on Nature, on Human Life, Musing in Solitude."
Or, to put it another way, 'Owing to lack of interest, tomorrow has been cancelled’
Needless to say there’s much interest in this subject.
Hardly surprising given its topical media focus and the obvious effects on humanity.
I’ll be sending our some less personalised transcripts of the text to a small group who share our interest.
LP&S
John.
JOHN RAMWELL