Climate Change: The Road Ahead

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.                                                                                                                                                                                             Margaret Mead

As we surge past 400 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into uncharted climate territory, we need another “ppm” – a People Powered Movement growing out of Margaret Mead’s “small group of citizens.” But we must never forget that “committed groups” are composed of committed individuals and it is with each one of us personally that transformative change must start.

The first step in the process is taking responsibility for the way we live our own lives. We cannot blame India and China for the climate breakdown until we have reduced our personal consumption footprints. Nor can we blame our government for delinquency on the climate file until we have put our own house in order. Each one of us, without exception, has to set a personal standard of sustainable living and, above all, adjust our fossil fuelled lifestyles.

We must acknowledge that, as one of the most privileged societies on earth, we have abused nature’s bounty. In just about every major environmental category Canada is rock bottom – size of our carbon and ecological footprints, energy efficiency and volume of garbage. If everyone lived at our level of consumption, we would need four more planets.

In our quest to refashion our own lifestyles and ultimately to transform societal principles and practices, we first have to raise some crucial questions – questions that may be both personal and painful. As a society we avoid confronting contentious issues and problems, especially those of an ethical and philosophical nature. Why do we shun moral questions and discussions about values when we have a tradition of moral enquiry going back to Ancient Greece?

Tragically, we have ignored the wisdom of our native people, especially their belief in the indivisibility of the natural and the spiritual world. Txeemsim, one of the mythological chiefs of the West Coast nations, urged his people to regard every action or decision as a moral choice and, furthermore, he suggested that selfish behaviour is destructive for both self and society.

While it may be trite to argue that questions are actually more important than answers, perceptive questions do force us to face our consciences and probe our innermost thoughts. It is also not easy to run from the answers when we have personally posed the questions. In many ways the breadth and the nature of our questions are an accurate reflection of our own spirituality and humanity and also the depth of our self-reflection.

We must move beyond the standard existential question “What is the purpose of life” and shift the focus away from narrow personal fulfillment to broader horizons. We have to reframe the question in terms of our relationship with nature, our lifestyle footprints and our commitment to future generations.

There is another compelling reason for raising the questions now: there is still time for remedial action. Alternatively, our offspring will raise the questions in later years – in outrage – when it will be too late for mitigation. A child born today will be almost 90 in 2100 and the questions and intergenerational tensions that will start surfacing by mid century when climate change kicks in with a vengeance may be very unpleasant and socially disruptive.

Listed below is a selection of questions that we might ask ourselves as we prepare a strategy for action:

• Why is climate change so widely ignored, minimized or actively denied by the majority of individuals and institutions in our society?
• Is society’s failure to tackle global warming the inevitable result of innate, selfish human nature?  Do we simply accept this as an unchangeable fact of life or must we challenge complacency through example, education and advocacy?
• Are we doing all that we can in our individual lives and households to reduce our own carbon foot prints and live sustainably?  What further concrete steps can we take towards the goal of achieving a truly environmentally responsible way of life and an example for those around us?
• Is it sufficient simply to put our own houses in order or do we have a moral obligation to challenge and change the prevailing inertia in society?
• If we do have such an obligation, what steps can we take to discharge it effectively in our workplaces, in our communities, in our schools and institutions, on our Boards of Directors, in our cities and in our dealings with governments at all levels?
• Why do we embrace myths, such as unrestricted economic growth, so readily?
• Why is enough, never enough in our society?
• How do we square our consciences with the impact of our lifestyles on the bio-capacity of the planet?
• How do we reconcile individual “self-interest” with public “social-interest”?
• Our rights, responsibilities and freedoms are constitutionally entrenched. Should Nature not also have constitutional rights?
• Do we have the moral right to unload the costs, both environmental and financial, of our lifestyles on the backs of unborn generations?
• Should the rights of the unborn be constitutionally protected?
• Are we aware that the costs of mitigation now are much less than the future costs of adaptation?
• Would it not be prudent to conserve energy resources for the use of future generations instead of pumping every last drop now?
• How can we blame oil companies for leaking pipelines and train derailments when they are simply feeding our fossil fuel addictions? Are we not partly culpable?
• Regardless of how we define the divine, can there be any greater peace on earth than peace with nature?

Global society has reached a fork in the road – either we continue the route of planetary plunder or we change course and dedicate ourselves to planetary renewal. As we contemplate which direction to pursue, we might consider revisiting two pertinent books.

The Road (2006) by Cormac McCarthy depicts a haunting dystopian world destroyed by an undefined ecological cataclysm. It is an ominous portrayal – and a portent – of a ravaged planet, populated by roving bands of murderers and miscreants. The only redeeming feature, of what is a depressing novel, is the journey of the father and son through the blighted landscape, sustained by their love for one another.

The Road is a brutal warning of what transpires when we pass an environmental tipping point and civil society implodes. It is also a powerful reminder of how humans and nature are bound together in a symbiotic relationship. If we nurture nature and we build co-operative communities, we will be able to slow the onset of climate disruptions and survive the inevitable hardships. If we disregard the warnings, then the apocalyptic world of The Road awaits us.

In The Road Less Traveled (1978), psychiatrist Scott Peck provides us with advice for a personal journey of emotional and spiritual growth. In a remarkably prescient book, written a decade before global warming became a major concern, Peck focuses on the importance of personal discipline in shaping our place in society. Delaying gratification by making sacrifices and taking responsibility for our own individual problems will bring larger social gains, he argues.

Peck believes that as part of responsible citizenship we must challenge and question continuously and always be prepared to change our views on the basis of new evidence. He contends that love is not only a feeling but, more importantly, it is an action-oriented emotion that enhances spiritual growth. But he warns that pursuing an ethical course of action inspired by love and compassion can be a lonely journey. The traits and qualities that Scott Peck describes will help reinforce our resolve as we embark on a crusade of environmental sanity and sanctity – the road more travelled.

As we undertake our journey, we should keep in mind the proverb that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Unless converted into action, good intentions become roadblocks on the path of change. In fact, acknowledging global warming and then doing nothing to mitigate the problem is simply another form of denial. If there is a road to hell, then it must surely be paved with bitumen.

The high road is always the loneliest of roads. As local author, Dan Gardner, points out in Risk, we are social animals and the views and values of our families, friends and networks shape our own views and values. Groupthink or group polarization and the pursuit of social status impose a subtle conformity on our thoughts, actions and moral standards. Acceptance is a powerful driver of behavior and few have the courage to challenge the consensus views of the group for fear of rejection. Try mentioning global warming in a cocktail conversation – it has a more chilling effect than an ice cube in a spritzer.

Don’t waver in your commitment to a sustainable planet and a safer world for future generations. Be resolute and passionate. Take courage: confront conformity, consumption and denial. Let Gandhi’s exhortation that we must first transform our own hearts and then be the change that we wish to see in the world empower you. The power of one can be profound. A path of environmental action and advocacy will also put you at peace with your conscience and as the old saying goes: I was born with nothing and all I go out with is my conscience. There can be no more comforting a companion at the end of our own journey than our conscience.