Living with unsettled and unsettling questions

@wwaycorrigan

[For an audio version of this blog story click here.]

As we grow older, we tend to become more comfortable in ourselves and what we're about.

The "truth" is out there. But where?

Manifested positively, it means we're less impressionable, less open to malignant manipulation. Negatively, it can lead to pigheadedness, becoming stuck in our ways.

On the latter, one of the most difficult things to admit is that we were wrong. Of course, for many of today's most contentious issues, we're still trying to work out what exactly is right, what is the "truth".

Covid conflicts

For example, back in the height of the novel coronavirus pandemic, the majority view was that one was not only being reckless but also selfish in not wearing a facemask to help reduce contagion.

Any evidence produced proving the efficacy of such masks for this exact purpose had, at best, many holes in it.

The same just-do-it pressure was at play when the vaccines were introduced. 'Vaccines have saved lives in the past, the rapidly tested and rolled out covid jabs seem to do likewise, therefore we can safely order everybody to take them.' That was the mantra, again supported by data that weren't without blind spots.

Today, such a stance does not stand up to balanced scrutiny. Even the infallible Dr Anthony Fauci has at least hinted that these vaccines are not a silver bullet for all age cohorts. Yet, there are those who still appear unwilling to accept that some of us clearly have robust natural immunity against covid.

Prophets of doom

This has similarities with the narrative around the climate crisis, or climate emergency if you prefer. Many say the science — the science that points to doomsday outcomes, that is — is settled; no aspect of it can be refuted. It's unquestionable fact. Even implementing radical changes now may not be enough to avoid our extinction or at least close-to-apocalyptic times.

'Some climate crisis activists are akin to religious fundamentalists. Their belief system is the way, the truth and the life.'

It's all about what we must do to lessen the impending doom, which seems somewhat oxymoronic.

For the record, one place to start for a less alarmist take on climate change is with Bjorn Lomborg.

Yes, there are those who truly believe we are only decades away from our extinction and the measures we take now are simply delaying the inevitable.

Yet, others in positions of influence and power appear less convinced of this destruction discourse but benefit from keeping it top of mind, promoting a perpetual state of fear. 

A positive end

It must be noted, I'm not saying that we should just carry on regardless. And many, particularly in the West, are at least trying to change what we now know have been harmful habits. 

Opting for cleaner, greener energy, engaging in practices that are more in harmony with the natural habitat, all of these should be pursued. (Heck, if more people lived like me we'd surely see a significant reduction in carbon emissions.)

The point is, by adopting the alarmist, hysterical approach, the chances of doing more harm than good increase. In fact, no real good may be done at all.

Indeed, some climate crisis activists are akin to religious fundamentalists — a tad ironic considering many of them are atheists who despise god-worshippers. Their belief system is the way, the truth and the life. Follow their path and we can have paradise on earth. Those who don't are wrong and hell bound.

Maybe they're right. However, in the same way that we can't say with 100 per cent certainty that there is no god, we can't know for sure what the planet will look like in the decades and centuries to come. Our changing of something in one area may lead to unexpected happenings in another, for good or for bad.

What can be said with certainty, though, is that our individual existence as we know it will end. We'll all face our "doom" at some stage.

So we may as well try to be as positive and proactive as possible while we're still living and breathing. Less of the hysterics, more helpfulness.
__________________________________________________________
Listen to The Corrigan Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Letter to the editor: Climate crisis hypocrites

@wwaycorrigan

Well, this is a real sign that things are returning to normal after the coronavirus chaos. The Irish Independent has published a letter of mine, unrelated to the pandemic as it is. Wonders never cease, hey?! (For some context, see https://wwcorrigan.blogspot.com/2021/08/my-unopened-open-letter-to-ireland.html.)

Below is a screenshot of the letter and you can read it in full at https://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/class-categories-demean-everyone-so-can-we-please-stop-defining-ourselves-by-our-earnings-41361557.html (fourth letter down). For a somewhat related piece see https://wwcorrigan.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-great-reset.html.

I didn't pick the heading.

_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

 

Our freedom isn't being taken away — we never had it in the first place

@wwaycorrigan

[Listen to an audio version of this blog entry here.]

Back in those halcyon days in the early years of the last decade, I published a blog post called Phantom freedom. If you're too busy to click on the hyperlink to read it, the basic idea was that despite today's more interconnected world (particularly in terms of travel, pre-pandemic of course), in many ways we are less free and independent now compared to our ancestors.

'Never in the field of human activity was so much damage done to so many by so few.' Indeed. (Graph from www.vox.com.)

Peak freedom

Little did I know that I was living through our time's freest period. Back then, it could be said, was peak freedom for the 21st century. Fair enough, one can excuse the current restrictions imposed on many aspects of our lives, being as they are a result of the damaging coronavirus monomania afflicting many across the globe, especially those in the agenda-setting, high-income nations.

The hope is that they'll recover soon enough and realise that there are other causes of death and destruction out there, that focusing too much on one threat results in the flourishing of others. One must try to be optimistic on this front.

However, for how long we'll be forced to prove in myriad ways that we're not a health risk to society to do just about any activity that involves mixing with others remains to be seen.

Whatever about the above, for better or for worse — and it's not at all clear which it will be — the kind of measures being proposed for the coming years in a bid for cleaner, greener living should finally — and thankfully — put an end to the crazy notion that we live in a free world. I say thankfully simply because it irks me when I hear people, particularly our rule-makers, utter that falsehood.

'It's difficult to be enthusiastic about these green new deals when those who do the most damage pay little more than lip service in terms of changing their ways.'

I must state that I'm all for living in a more efficient and greener way. In fact, I wager that if more people in the comfortable classes lived as minimalist a life as I do there would be much less of a resource drain on the planet.

Whilst it was written somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I already follow to some degree a number of the recommendations in my The Great Reset post from earlier this year.

Thus, the likes of pay-as-you-drive road taxes which countries such as the UK are proposing, that's fine by me. I don't own a car these days and it's unlikely I ever will (again, that is — I did have one for two years in Ireland when I was in my early 20s. Oh the innocence of youth).

When it comes to air travel, with carbon pricing mooted, this mode of transport looks set to become the preserve of the rich once more. Again, I've no major complaints about this. Most people — in the comfortable classes specifically — fly more than they really need to.

Road to ruin

The issue I have with many of these ubiquitous green new deals is that those peddling them, from what I can see, are inflicting greater hardship on the rest of us in a bid to reduce the harmful effects of their very own excesses.

'We all must work collectively on this' is the mantra when they've been the main culprits, the greatest polluters, the biggest producers of waste — and hypocrisy. There must be something in the air they breathe up on that moral high ground.

Somewhat paradoxically, the UK government talks of 'levelling up'. It's about improving the lot for areas of the country that have traditionally been less well-off. Yet globally, if the many forecasts are to be believed, levelling up at current consumption rates is a road to ruin.

OK, levelling up following a green path is the idea. Nonetheless, it's difficult to be enthusiastic about this when those who do the most damage pay little more than lip service in terms of changing their ways.

The cynical view is that it all simply amounts to exerting greater control over the lives of the relatively powerless. And many, sadly, are either blissfully unaware of this or seem to have no problem with it at all. The future looks rather bleak indeed.
_______________________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Rednecks rise again

Back in my early secondary school days, as a country lad heading off to mix it with the townies, it was common for the latter to mock us. We were farmer boys, or rednecks, as they say in some parts. 

It was generally a bit of innocent slagging but no doubt it had its origins in the long-held belief that workers of the land were a bit "behind", simple if you will, compared to those from urban settings.

Cattle on Bogotá's northern limits: Bringing a bit of the country to the city.

Of course, the townies of Ballaghaderreen, along with everybody else from "down the country", were derogatorily seen as bog folk, "culchies" being the precise word, by those from the capital Dublin.

Zoom out even more and the whole of Ireland was traditionally viewed as being backward by our "superior" neighbours in Britain. 'Strange specimens those Irish, aren't they?'

City fat cats

Modern, advanced, rich societies emanate from urban strongholds with their schools of excellence and suchlike. Rural areas only get the crumbs, enough to keep them ticking over, from the power brokers seated around that grandiose table. So it goes anyway.

Nonetheless, keeping those seated at the urban table well-fed and content with affordable food is nigh-on impossible without the simple country folk doing their bit to provide it.

'We’re just a few consecutive disasters away from very troubling times.'

The irony here is that while the great advancements in communications and technology have made the world a smaller place, many urban dwellers have become quite removed, mentally at least, from the rural areas that they rely on to stay alive.

OK, they have other, more complicated, complex concerns to worry about. The country serves simply as escapism from the concrete jungle. Engagement with it is at a superficial level only.

What's more, aren't the technological improvements in agriculture and the like, urban brainchildren as most have been, resulting in greater yields and reduced workloads for those who farm the land?

There's merit to that.

Yet, to continue providing for the growing urban masses, more engagement with, and investment in, the countryside are required, not less.

Misplaced priorities

Whether one believes in man-made climate change or not (Donald Trump, considering his age, doesn't have to concern himself with it), we can't deny the fact that we have been experiencing extreme weather events that threaten our precious food supply. We could be just a few consecutive disasters away from quite troubling times.

How many of us would be able to survive in a kind of post-apocalyptic planet, something akin to what we often see portrayed in Hollywood movies?

It would seem fair to say that a majority of First Worlders have become too reliant on our modern comforts, on a lifestyle where we can get pretty much anything we want when we want it.

'We won't be too concerned about our mental health when our very existence is under threat.'

As a species, we could also be accused of vastly overvaluing non-essentials at the expense of the essentials. Think Hollywood again, that whole world of showbiz and fame.

Heck, I left the land I was reared on (as the majority of rural-born people do these days) to go on to pursue a career (can I call it that?!) in media. Fair enough, journalism plays — or at least used to play — an important role as the fourth estate, it can be a force of positive change.

However, the counter-argument here is that this vocation has lost its way and relevance in recent times (whisper it, #FakeNews. Thanks Donald). And don't get me started again on the evil incarnate that is marketing!

On a similar note, a Colombian psychologist friend told me how he wanted to get "back to the land", fearing that without preventative action now he would be useless when faced with a future scenario where one had to fend for oneself for the bare necessities.

As he put it, when it's a simple matter of life or death, very few people will be looking to take the time to think deeply about it all, teasing out the pros and cons. His profession would be practically surplus to requirements.

Basically, and as much as I'm not a fan of Christianity (or any religion really), the old mantra of 'ashes to ashes, dust to dust and dust you shall return' rings true.

The land, the planet will have the last laugh.

Those old backward rednecks who understand it a little better than most mightn't seem so repulsive then.
________________________________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan – The Blog & IQuiz “The Bogotá Pub Quiz”.
Listen to The Colombia Cast podcast here.

Saving ourselves (planet Earth is fine)

These seem to be especially frightening times we're living in. One could be forgiven for thinking things have an end-of-days feel to them.

The end of the world as we know it?

The global political picture seems as divided as ever. Well, you could argue it's similar to Europe in the 1930s, so we've been here before, with people finding comfort in the darker corners of the Left and Right, depending on how the Facebook algorithms roll for you.

Therein, of course, lies one major difference: Europe in the 1930s didn't have the internet and its "social" media to contend with (it did have a good dollop of censorship all the same).

Whatever the case, there's nothing really novel about the political — and economic — situation of any period troubling the masses. It would nearly freak us out more if this wasn't so.

Doomed

What appears to be setting these worrying times apart from previous eras are the natural disasters looming that look set to seriously alter the way we currently live — and where we live, too. (At 2,600 metres above sea level, Bogotá's inhabitants should be safe enough from rising sea levels a fair bit longer than most other major population centres around the world.)

'The optimistic view is that we can still turn things around.'

As the almost weekly scientific reports from respected quarters tell us, if we don't change our ways now, that is to say use green energy sources as opposed to those that contribute to global warming, catastrophe awaits.

That's the optimistic view: Time is still on our side, it remains in our hands, just about, to avert the worst-case scenario.

A lot of the language used in this battle for survival is about 'saving the planet'.

Solid Earth

Yet, as the late, great (most of the time, anyway) US comedian George Carlin pointed out years back, the planet doesn't need much saving. 

Barring some unprecedented meteorite attack, a calamity with our sun, things of that magnitude, the future of Earth looks pretty solid for the next few million years.

OK, we can only go on past form, but as advanced as we humans like to think we are, it's unlikely that it will be our dirty work that spells the end for the planet.

The most likely scenario, think dinosaurs here, is that the planet will continue on well after the last human on it breathes his/her (or whatever other gender is out there now) last.

'If we're going down, we're taking a host of others with us.'

What we sophisticated humans are indisputably doing, and here I differ from Carlin, is making sure that as we go down, we're taking a host of other species with us. And we're doing a pretty good job at that.

As Carlin put it, for the planet we're probably like fleas. An irritant, no more, no less. Now if the planet had its own way, it would most likely just get rid of us and keep the majority of other living things (yes, even those dastardly mosquitoes).

But can we change our ways?

However, as the host doesn't directly interfere in how its parasites go about their business, bar the occasional earthquake, volcanic eruption and the like, our actions ensure — and have ensured — other, more low-maintenance users of the globe cease to exist.

So, rather than thinking of 'saving the planet', we should be thinking of 'saving ourselves', collectively that is.

Yet, it's the self-centred nature of many of us that will put paid to that. Forget the utilitarian 'greater good for the greater number' school of thought. We seem happier with 'the greater destruction for the greater number.' 'Heck, if we're doomed anyway we might as well live to the max rather than inconveniencing ourselves fighting a lost cause.'

Oh well, it's one, whisper it "final solution" to our money and political woes.
_____________________________________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".