Humans are genetically programmed for growth and survival. How else do you explain our wanton domination and destruction of other species? If you have watched someone dying, you have witnessed the greatest fight of all, first hand. A battle that can continue, after consciousness is lost and a vegetative state settles in, and before the finality of death silences, the most ardent protestor in a war that simply, in the end, cannot be won.
The majority of the ‘civilised’ first world populace of our blue planet, regularly swallows opiates of projected brave new worlds, via a variety of competing subscriber and free to air media platforms. The normalisation of the destruction of the planet is being streamed directly into our lounge-rooms. We lap up well-crafted fiction that feels uncomfortably real.
Are we being programmed for acceptance of the inevitable?
Any savvy business decision is based on the certainty of the outcome, so instead of actively promoting change, a plethora of dystopian post-apocalyptic landscapes are offered, both on our dying planet and in other unknown galaxies.
Thousands are already waiting in a cryogenic state to be reconnected to new forms, to extend their conscious experience. I know who I’d surrender first, in the choice of refrigerated goods, on our rapidly heating planet.
Very few admit to being 100% comfortable with change. The human experience is a metronome rocking between avoidance, adjustment and acceptance. Somewhat like our attitude towards dying. Anything dying, and perhaps that is where the problem lies. Mortality is not a dirty word, but it may well be the filthiest one unspoken. So how comfortable are we in accepting that the planet is in palliative care?
What level of discomfort are we willing to undergo, to save the planet for future generations? This is the unanswered question. What type of personal sacrifice will it take? More than the personal shopping bags and plastic bottles?
Instead of ballot boxes against political parties, future voting should consist of a questionnaire. A snappy algorithm can determine the importance the population of the world places upon having a planet to live on, but would we trust it or prefer human error to dark web intervention? It is hard to know what is fake and real in a world that prides itself on manufacturing deception and illusion.
There is so much to relinquish: ideological superiority, capitalistic control, the tangle of financial gossamer, to name a few, and the overwhelming fear, that it will all collapse like a stack of cards.
Perhaps it is simply too late and Australia has sold out like the rest of the globe. Are we merely, a global race of rainbow-coloured lemmings occupying a planet on fire? We seem to be collectively in an unholy rush to the edge, grabbing pleasure and useless things, before the enviable predictable long drop into nothingness.
Now, now….that is far too bleak…settle down….After all, we humans are equally creative and resourceful, as we are destructive. What about art, culture, music and all that representative stuff, that we are known for?
There are empirical studies that prove the symbiotic relationship between creative expression and business innovation. Surely all these bright minds and wise elders, can’t all be hysterical climate activists?
Must we wait until civil unrest becomes the gauge? Not in Australia, we are a tinder box in flames.
Clever corporations have kept us busy, promoting self-expression, individuality and experimentation as a channel to productivity and performance and possibly the Holy Grail: happiness.
It is in our nature as humans, to solve tricky puzzles, and what is more tricky than the current one, the salvation of the planet?
The definition of happiness and where to find it is, of course, is open to conjecture, however, I imagine having access to a living planet to dwell upon would be number one on everyone’s happiness list.
For many right now in Australia, it will be a roof over their head, while they count the cost of environmental warfare.
How different it could have been, without leaders in absentia.
While time itself could be argued as an unquantifiable state. Focus on our country for the preservation of the people, is the exchange expected by the democratic process of voting a team for the top job.
Is it impossible to expect politicians to spend their time representing the common good?
Hard to pin anyone down to their promises, like the fleeting Monarch blue butterfly. You remember those, right?
Surely we can bring ourselves back from the brink? Yes? No? Maybe?
Too hard basket already? Fancy a little light relief? Romcom anyone?