The below post is from Michael Quall in response to TOTO Challenge #1
like white privilege, the wealth privilege of developed nations goes largely unchallenged.
like their populist majority, these wealthy nations prefer to think of themselves as ‘average’, and ‘middle class’, lest they be viewed by their peers as elitist or aloof.
the reality is they are rolling in cash, of every currency and every denomination. hiding behind a thin, weak veil of democracy and a ‘free’ market, these nations flaunt their privilege effortlessly, rubbing the noses of their undeveloped and developing cousins in the dry, dusty playground of poverty.
but monetary wealth is not the be all and end all of this imbalance. privilege is currency, and a voice is what it buys.
the squeaky wheels don’t just get the grease – they own the grease.
on the global battlefront of climate change, two intersecting debates continue to rage:
is climate change real? and
should we do something about it?
now, i can hear you all asking yourselves “shouldn’t that be ‘what can we do about it’?” and you’re probably right. in fact, there are at least half a dozen questions that would be much more proactive than ‘should we…’ – so why are we still stuck on the opening stanza?
the most pressing question that most of us have glossed over is “in human terms, who has the most to lose if we do nothing about climate change?”.
and the answer is not Australia. or the United States. or China. it’s not farmers. it’s not industry. or tourism. it’s not kevin rudd, barack obama, bob brown, or andrew bolt.
it’s the voiceless. it’s the nameless. it’s those people, and families, and communities who, for all intents and purposes, have nothing of value to offer us in the absence of the climate change debate. and it is those people who will be affected most dramatically, and who indeed will disappear first if we do nothing (or the wrong thing).
poverty can be viewed in many ways. as a lack of wealth. as a lack of resources. as a lack of the basic necessities of food, shelter, and water. but above all, it is a lack of privilege. the privilege of self-determination, of self-actualisation – the privilege of an equitable place at the big round table of global socio-political debate.
poverty means not having any chips to bargain with, regardless of their relevance to the discussions.
“acquiesce to our demands, or we will withhold our oil”
“acquiesce to our demands, or we will withhold our uranium”
“acquiesce to our demands, or we will withhold our wheat and beef”
“acquiesce to our demands, we will withhold our trade, our technology, our wealth, and our fanciness”
what about “acquiesce to our quiet and humble requests, or we will die in drought, and drown under rising sea levels”?
every night on the 6pm news i can find out the value of a barrel of oil, or an ounce of gold. but what’s the currency conversion on a human life?
privilege means having options and alternatives.
it means having higher ground to build on, when our coasts recede. it means having the technology to divert fresh water when our creeks and rivers begin to whither. it means having the choice to eat alternate produce, when our fields and crops diminish.
it means being able to drive our cars and burn our coal and having the choice to just. not. care.
it means being able to ignore the entire issue of climate change, or at the very least to drag our feet in the development of viable solutions, for at least another generation or more before our very existence as a nation is threatened.
and it means being able to turn and look the other way as developing nations disappear. as their coastlines recede, as their deserts expand, as their weather becomes more erratic, as their meagre resources deplete, as their population is wiped out – probably in a generation, or less.
many proponents of democracy and a free market espouse the ideal of helping those “…who help themselves…” – but what about those who cannot? my experience has shown me a great many scenarios where, in the localised context, people aren’t able to help themselves. that’s what the cycle of poverty is – it’s a trap, that often can only be opened or released from the outside. we reject ‘victimhood’, but sometimes we forget that there are genuinely innocent victims. we cry foul of ‘passive welfare’, and then deny assistance to those who are in genuine need.
privilege means having choices.
the choice to make change.
the choice to reach out.
the choice to share your privilege with those incapable of generating their own.
the most noble use of privilege is to acknowledge that it largely stems from circumstance.
african nations did not choose centuries of colonial rape and pillaging, followed by decades of civil war – that is simply their contemporary circumstance.
pacific nations did not choose to be surrounded by rising seas, on land that is equally as beautiful as it is devoid of commerce – that is simply their historic circumstance.
indigenous peoples did not choose to be denied their traditional trade routes, be pushed off their lands, and to be forced into artificial co-habitation with no social capital to negotiate with – that is simply their cultural circumstance.
privilege means being able to cut through this circumstance, to admit openly that it is not written in stone, and to acknowledge within the context of the climate change discussion that what is at stake is not oil, is not energy, is not jobs, or industry, or political might and power.
it is human life. each worth as much as the other. not measured by wealth, or worth, or even contribution. just, simply, a life to be saved.
do you feel privileged?
Tags: challenge, climate change, human rights
-
a short read – heavy opinion, devoid of facts: http://blogs.actionaid.org.au/toto/2009/12/01/voice-of-the-voiceless/ (via @nomadiquemc)
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
More from author
-
Michael, you are clearly passionate but your blog makes me feel like I’m being blamed for the problem of climate change. I believe that I, like most people in ‘privileged’ nations, are guilty of ignorance and perhaps denial, but not of purposeful cruelty. The tone of anger comes across a little too strongly in your blog for my liking and does not make me inclined to throw my support behind ActionAid and combatting climate change. I feel a more informative and encouraging approach would have worked much better than your argumentative attempt. I am sorry to say that I am also a fan of capital letters at the beginning of sentences. I have learnt much more about the impact of climate change on people from other posts.
-
voice of the voiceless – @nomadiquemc’s blog for Project TOTO @ActionAid_aus http://bit.ly/4WXjjl
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
More from author
-
thanks for your comments shelley, and your honesty.
when i first received this challenge, i did sit down with the intent of using the month or so that i had at my disposal to write a well thought out, researched and analytical ‘mini-essay’ on the issue of climate change and its relationship to poverty. I’m a career bureaucrat, so that’s not a stretch for me.
but that’s not how i write, not anymore at least, and certainly not on my own ‘blog (at http://www.nomadiquemc.com). in my own words I’m “heavy on opinion, light on facts”. I’m not an academic, or a journalist.
i thought about something @stilgherrian said in his wrap up of his own adventure, about having unwittingly censored himself whilst both blogging and tweeting from his Project TOTO journey. i wouldn’t want to make that mistake.
so here, from me, what you see is what you get. complacency is the enemy, and provocation is my weapon of choice.
and if that’s not a good fit for ActionAid and Project TOTO, then that will come out in the wash. I’d rather be ousted for being me, than selected for being full of shit. what ActionAid is trying to achieve is far too important to be entrusted to poseurs.
MikQ
(PS – i type better than i write, but i write like i speak. if i go back to edit something I’ve written, I’m just as likely to delete the whole thing as i am to muck about with the shift key. i think, i type, i hit send. my mouth is the same…)
More from author
-
Everything you said in the last sentence of your response, Michael, is the antithesis of what a writer should be. Sentences should be grammatically correct, backed by solid evidence, and relatively objective. This isn’t supposed to be a drunken text to your friends, although it sure looks like one.
Shooting from the hip is fine in the pub with your mates, but not everyone wants to know what your own personal opinions are on this particular website… especially on such important issues.
The “i think, i type, i hit send” isn’t such a great approach, I’m afraid, if you want people to take action, or at least to take you seriously…
-
I think this is a good blog. It’s clear that you really, truly and un-censoredly believe everything you are saying. It does come across a little like blame, but if it is the truth – although it’s as a group, not individually – that we are responsible for climate change, then it’s no bad thing to say so. You assemble lots of arguments in favour of acting about climate change, and really engage readers on an emotional level to respond with urgency to the problem of rising sea levels etc.
However, whilst I appreciate that you are trying to be geniune and are comfortable with finding a different project if TOTO isn’t a good fit, what I would say is that the main benefit of a clearer structure (referring to the comments about capital letters above) is ease of reading. The layout above did make me more inclined to skim and harder to read, therefore making it less likely that a more casual reader would reach the end and take on board what you were saying seriously. It is a shame that there is more ‘propaganda’ than clear evidence, but I think that depends on your audience. Nevertheless, clearly this audience do really require something a little more well researched and obviously well thought out. -
I must disagree with the other comments in that your piece really spoke to me. It doesn’t need to be heavy on facts , it is about human ethics and how we exist and interact in this world as much as anything else. I didn’t find the tone angry at all, it felt very thoughtful to me, perhaps because what you were saying speaks to exactly how i feel so I do not feel accused by it. We are extremely privileged, not by any right or talent or anything even tangible – just by a stroke of fate. What we do with that privilege is how we should be judged. Even the comments about grammer and punctuation are about excluding others, not conciously or willingly but that is their effect. Those without a formal education or a working knowledge of spelling feel intimidated or scared to state their opinion. That is snobbery. Those of us who have had the benefit of education, healthcare, good nutrition, human rights etc etc should be helping those who haven’t to get their voice heard. Worse case scenario if Australia is badly affected by climate change, or war or famine I can emigrate, others are not so lucky – they’re best bet is to become a refugee (and we know how the world loves refugees).
So yes I do feel privileged ( even if I can’t spell it!)
Additional comments powered by BackType
ActionAid Website
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
10 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://blogs.actionaid.org.au/toto/2009/12/01/voice-of-the-voiceless/trackback/