Categories
Politics

Face-eating leopard develops a taste for white meat

For those of you who don’t know, there is an internet meme called the Face Eating Leopard.

From a tweet by Adrian Bott (@cavalorn) in October 2015: “‘I never thought leopards would eat MY face,’ sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party.”

You see it used especially around people who voted for Trump – once, twice, thrice – and are now facing the deportation of a spouse. The subtext is ‘how could they be so stupid/selfish’ and ‘karma is a bitch’.

Let’s step back a bit. All through the 80s, 90s and so on, a certain type of comfortable asshole cheered while the state functionaries dished out violence – sometimes fast (Miners’ Strike) but usually “slow” (rule-changes, casualisation etc etc) to the lower orders, imposing so-called ‘market discipline’ on them. Comfortable professionals who didn’t make common cause with people who they considered their inferiors, never dreaming that they would ever be on the receiving end.

But let’s step back further than the ‘civilised’ West and current concerns for AI/LLMs taking jobs from nice responsible middle-class people. Let’s look at the climate, the ultimate leopard.

All through the 90s, 2000s, 2010s there were a whole bunch of people watching while others put their liberty and lives on the line over climate. Silly hippies, hysterical, get a job etc etc etc.

Why? Because they assumed that IF climate change was a thing then “we could adapt.” Adapt was code for “well, I have air-conditioning, and if you don’t you’re one of the poors, a loser who can’t keep up, who deserves what they get.”

All that time, they assumed that they were ‘safe’ – because they spoke English, were white, had a degree and a Proper Job, and some savings and all the rest of it. If the leopard was real, it would never eat THEIR face.

And here we are. The leopard is growling in the next room, scratching the door so loud it’s like that Edgar Allen Poe story about the Tell-tale Heart.

The leopard, akin to the beast we’ve been poking with a sharp stick, is hungry and the leopard really really does not care who he eats next.

If we wanted everything to stay the same, everything had to change. But people were too smug, too arrogant and complacent to see that, thinking the leopard would never develop a taste for white meat.

Well, it has. Nom nom nom.

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing Economics of mitigation Politics

January 21, 2010 – The flub that sank a thousand policies #auspol

On this day, in 2010, – yes, another Australia one, but it “matters” –  Australian  Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, was caught out having to admit that his proposed “carbon pollution reduction scheme” was dead and that he was kicking the whole climate issue into the long legislative grass.

The CPRS was an insanely complex piece of legislation. Economist Ross Garnaut said of it in December 2008 that  “”Never in the history of Australian public finance has so much been given without public policy purpose, by so many, to so few,”“ – and that’s before the further watering down. Green groups had called it a give-away to the fossil fuel lobby, and the Green Party had refused to support it in parliament in late November 2009, meaning that it failed to become law.

Rudd was in Norwood, a leafy, and relatively affluent suburb of a large country town called Adelaide in South Australia.

As leader of the Australian Labor Party, Rudd had used climate change as a battering ram to differentiate himself from Prime Minister John Howard, and been elected to do something about the issue. As Prime Minister from late 2007, he had been playing chicken with the Liberal National Party, especially its leader Malcolm Turnbull, and had initially rejoiced when Turnbull was replaced by the dark horse (and subsequent wrecking ball) Tony Abbott. 

But the climate conference in December 2009 in Copenhagen didn’t go well. And in the aftermath, Rudd ignored the urging of senior Labour Party members to call a snap election on the question of climate policy, and then didn’t even come up with a plan B. So he was caught on the hop. We know all of this because the period is intensely reported in the battle of the memoirs. And I’d alert you to Philip Chubb’s Power Failure. Julia Gillard’s My Story, Paul Kelly’s Triumph and Demise


What happened next?  Australia entered a period of extreme volatility about climate change that  has brought down successive prime ministers and left the country with enormous policy failures around climate, energy, renewables, you name it. If Rudd had had the courage of his convictions, or even just taken on the Green Party idea of a temporary carbon tax while an Emissions Trading Scheme was devised/an election held, none of this needed to have happened. And here we are. 

Why this matters? Because I think you can make an argument that Australia’s confusion and cynicism about climate change and politics is directly related to Rudd’s failure to pursue the climate agenda to the ballot box again, if needs be.,

Rudd had enjoyed going on and on about climate change as “the great moral challenge of our generation” (which it is). People believed him. Rudd’s popularity remained stratospheric. Then, when people decided that Rudd had been using climate as just another “positioning issue,” they felt cheated, betrayed, taken for fools. Rudd’s personal approval ratings took a massive hit. Climate was the only issue, but it certainly was the straw that broke the camel’s back. 

So if you, as a political leader, are going to use climate change as an issue, you better bring your A game and if your A game doesn’t work, you better switch to your B game, which is as good as your A game. And if you don’t, you will cause havoc. And it is now harder than in Rudd’s day, because everyone is cynical, everyone is kinda terrified, whether they can articulate it to themselves or not.

Categories
Australia Politics Predatory delay

January 9, 1995 – “Efficiency” promises vs hated and feared regulation/taxation #Predatory Delay #auspol

On this day in 1995, as part of its war to head off a carbon tax, the fossil fuel lobby released a report claiming that Energy Efficiency would be a better better bet than the (dreaded, to them) carbon tax being proposed by the Australian Environment Minister John Faulkner.

1995 Gill, P. 1995. Energy efficiency outstrips gains of carbon tax: study The Australian Financial Review 9th January

It was part of a flurry of “the sky will fall” reports that said even the mildest of carbon taxes would cause untold economic devastation to the Australian economy (a tactic still being used, because, well, it works).

Why this matters – we need to remember that the rhetoric of “efficiency” and clean green growth to head off even the mildest of reformist measures and regulation is a favoured and time-honoured tactic of those who don’t want anyone to get between them and their supply.  See Jeremiah Bohr’s 2016 Environmental Politics article for how the alleged “free-marketers”  square that circle.

What happened next: The carbon tax proposal was defeated, and morphed into “emissions trading schemes”. These waxed and waned, and a national one was finally introduced in July 2012. It was promptly axed by the next government and down (under) to this day, the very mention of it is enough to send shadow climate change ministers into a whiter shade of pale.  

Further reading

Bohr, J. (2016) The ‘climatism’ cartel: why climate change deniers oppose market-based mitigation policy. Environmental Politics, Vol. 25, 5.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1156106


See also

Jevons Paradox

Ecological Modernisation