Author: sjk

Lives and works in Bunjurgen, Queensland, Australia.

Are we locked in a dance to the death (economically anyway) with fossil fuels

factors other than the purely economic must be taken into account. The problem with our purely economic thinking is that it is tainted with neoliberalist assumptions about worth. Humans, certainly all the ones in the first world, have been programmed to accept the notion that economic growth, most particularly at the personal level, is essential. To challenge this paradigm is to adopt the denialist annoying Greta Thunberg ‘how dare you’ stance. But in fact what we do need to do - if you factor anything other than pure Homo economicus thinking - is to do away with stuff. Perhaps take a significant dip in our GDP rich life. Give up some goods, some cargo, some economic cudos. Will we be poorer for it? Will our health go into decline? Will our world become much smaller? Perhaps we’ll travel less, the carbon load of flying is prohibitive. But will we be poorer? Will our air and waterways be cleaner? Will some of the wilderness be restored? Will we rediscover community? I don’t know, but I don’t think we can continue with business as usual. Because business isn’t (despite what they tell us) everything. We can choose to remain fossil fooled or we can choose not to be.

Letter to our first grandchild…

Corporations run governments. That seems to be a truth pretty much universal. Corporations determine policies; the chief democratic will of most nations at present is one which does not want to divest itself of the making of profits and greenhouse gases. Our economies are well oiled. Coal seamed. Denial of our climate emergency is a well-funded industry.

Capitalism: the neo-liberal way to sin

Neo-liberalism adherents favour small government and demand that government regulation of economic practice is reduced or absent; neo-liberalism demands an allowance of business as usual because business knows best and will do best, eventually, for people. Neo-liberalists prefer no counterweight of unionism, or organised workers’ counterweights to the practice of business. What neo-liberalist capitalism permitted in the 18th and 19th centuries – and increasingly now - is an exploitation of workers and growing inequality. The natural world was deemed [biblically justified] the dominion of man, available for our use and so we see the exploitation of natural resources.

Thoughts on the climate deniers

Have recently chosen to engage with the deniers. You do not, of course, need ask which deniers I refer to.  So here is a list of my replies to some of their unreasoning; names have been changed to protect the approximately ignorant. I've used headings to cluster my replies. Greens started/promote bush fires: Duane, I … Continue reading Thoughts on the climate deniers →

Review of Tom Strelich’s novel, Dog logic

Dog logic; it makes sense Some stories remind us not to take ourselves too seriously, to curb our hubris; perhaps remind us how invidious we can be. ‘Dog logic’ is dystopian, sort of, a book about a man, Hertell, wounded by the now (wits scrambled, wife left, career in ruins) and out of sorts. He … Continue reading Review of Tom Strelich’s novel, Dog logic →

On the alleged death of homo economicus

If I am to take Nick Hanauer’s[1] advice and kill off homo economicus then what I fear I’ll be left with is – all that someone of a liberal-humanist bent can ask, I suppose – homo impotenticus. A person unpurposed: because I am not alone, because I am not reified individual, because I am part … Continue reading On the alleged death of homo economicus →