The Harsh Reality: You Make COP26 Useless
Let’s stop being raging buffoons in this climate talk frenzy.
Greta Thunberg is out and about once more. She calls out the COP26 for being a massive PR show with little regard for making real changes. While her argument that these climate change summits and meetings and conferences and whatnots are setting too low a bar for people to achieve, and that even if all countries stick to the goals, the outlook for future generations remains grim, is that truly the root cause for their patheticness?
For years on end, the younger generation has learned about green energy, reducing waste, and conservation. We talk about all the big things, like wind farms and incinerators and better urban planning. Often, we argue that these make fundamental changes in how we consume natural resources, having greater impacts than individuals.
Yet, most governments we complain about are democratically elected and should, theoretically, respond to their voters. Assuming that people wish for a new, green lifestyle from heart, most of the developed world would have steered that way already. So what has been missed in between?
Perhaps some don’t consider the environment on voting day. When making important choices, they prioritise business and jobs and social welfare all the same. To them, COP26 is also another once-in-a-while event, where they pretend to be oh-so passionate about the environment and considerate for future generations.
But more importantly, maybe we only care if policies don’t affect us. Social scientists would call this the “not in my backyard effect”. Many who fall victim to this would say, yes, climate change and global warming is happening, and we need to do something about it. But yes, let’s buy that new cropped hoodie from H&M; it’s in season. Oh yes, let’s get prepackaged food from the supermarket; it’s convenient. All the impacts of fast fashion and preconsumer waste? Down the drain.
With voters like this, would governments actually lead change? What would happen if they said: beginning tomorrow, we would dedicate 20% of our government expenditure on infrastructure for green energy and recycling? We need money to replace fossil fuel-based power plants with solar panels and dams. The same people who proclaim devotion to the environment would start asking questions like: what about healthcare? Isn’t education more important? At least half of them would say so. I assure you.
On the international arena, we see developed and developing nations point fingers — one party claims that climate change is occurring because of the emissions during the industrial revolution some centuries ago, while the other says it’s the current emissions from developing nations. But I see the same things happening on the spectator stands. People point fingers at the leaders on the high table, claiming that they are not leading change. But who could they lead if no one is a true follower?
Without the masses committing to change their lifestyle and spending, we are all just actors in this theatrical act, where everyone pretends to care about the environment until the curtains close.
Now I pose this question: what would you actually give up for society to stride towards a sustainable future, instead of forever remaining in our baby steps?
