Realist, not conformist analysis of the latest financial, business and political news

The Ten Existential Threats To Humanity – Free Speech Is One Apparently

There’s a report out from Australia about how everything’s going to pot, we’re all gonna die (Aieeee!) and shouldn’t we do something about it?

the answer, apparently, being to curb free speech and institute a really effective propaganda campaign.

No, I do not jest:

The 10 threats are climate change, environmental decline and extinction, nuclear weapons, resource scarcity (including water scarcity), food insecurity, dangerous new technologies, overpopulation, chemical pollution, pandemic disease, and denial and misinformation.

Their point being that if you deny that any of the first nine are existential threats then you are spreading misinformation. To which the answer is to stop your free speech to disagree with the enlightened.

The report is here:

There is a need to galvanise people
everywhere to come together to debate,
design and implement innovative
strategies to transition to a sustainable
world – and to avoid bequeathing an
environmental and societal catastrophe to
future generations.
The dominant global discourse,
economically, politically and academically,
has for several decades been captured by
excessive optimism – while voices calling
for fairness, equity or warning of limits to
growth and risks have been largely
ignored or suppressed. Part of the
problem is that there is significant (often
deliberate and well-funded)
misinformation that contradicts the
scientific consensus on catastrophic risk.
Delusions, carefully implanted, are
difficult to correct.

So, Bjorn Lomborg needs to be told to shut up then, right? Anything we might do over and above that?

We need to convince our fellow citizens of
Earth of the necessity to commit ourselves
and every belief system we hold, to
survive and thrive. We must recruit the
best and brightest young humans, not to
make arms, but to build the process for
surviving and thriving for the whole of

Oooh, cool!

The Round Table considered that sound
education in living healthily and
sustainably, within the limits of our
planet, will be indispensable to humans
surviving and thriving in this, the Century
of our greatest risk. Every citizen of Earth
must understand their role and their
responsibility in making our future safe
and our wellbeing secure.
Even before school, preschools can
develop in their students a strong
emotional attachment to the planet, a
motivation to support its well-being and
the beginnings of a scientific
understanding about the place of humans
as part of an ecosystem. Teachers have
the potential to contribute to the future
of the planet by developing critical
thinking and articulate students, with a
deep understanding of the scientific and
social knowledge needed to sustain the
planet, and to be able to explain and
argue for the planet to a range of
audiences in different modes.
However, if humans are to survive and
thrive, these concepts and their
requirements must be built into all levels
of the education system, in all countries,
and integrated into all subjects studied
and taught. This does not call for a major
overhaul of the curricula, but rather
adjustment to its content so that it
educates students about the need for a
viable planet to support human life and
society, and how to achieve it. This theme
needs to run across all subjects taught
with the aim of raising a new general of
global citizens able to work together to
achieve it.

We brainwash all the kiddies and thereby create the New Ecological Xe that will inherit the Earth.

And don’t forget, anyone issuing the slightest little parp or peep questioning any of this is spreading disinformation and delusion and so can – should – be sent to the Gulag.

Overall it’s just that Birkenstock stamping on a human face, forever, again isn’t it?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
4 years ago

That Dr Hewson ? of Oz GST fame ? Another academic. Odd how no mention of decent energy sources is ever mentioned, just the usual hand waving over renewables. Yet the water reprocessing they demand be built will need a lot of reliable energy. The writers trust in batteries is touching if implied. I assume the real goal is a return to deep green desired poverty, short lives in moderate isolation and squalor. Even Marx commented on the idiocy of rural life in his backward times. I take it that rewilding half the earth means wolves and big cats culling… Read more »

4 years ago
Reply to  Snarkus

Yes. That Hewson who was leader of the Liberal party. Maybe I should think about voting for the Farmers and Shooters party, or Pauline Hanson. Still, Bob Katter is probably the best. At least he wants to shoot all the crocodiles.

4 years ago

These nine “threats” are really just nine leftie slogans. And, like the Green New Deal, it’s less persuasive when all the nostrums are advanced simultaneously. Shocking and extreme weather, differences in statistics by individual and by race, lack of complete planning, and the fact that in 2150 we might need new energy technology, are simply not problems. Rhetoric about the threat of dissent is the final step in writing an unpersuasive essay.

4 years ago
Reply to  Spike

Spike, so true. Alarming assertions made, most of which have no connection to reality. We all remember uninfluencial books such as Limits to growth, Population Bomb. I remember many OMG papers about how coal and oil will run out by 2000, 2012, etc. Almost as if Gore Effect is at work. All the things we were running out of have dropped in price. Water might be only exception, but if 4th gen reactors were built, that problem would go away too. The seeking of unearned power by a self appointed elite of experts has never ended well. The 1930s and… Read more »

4 years ago

“The Guardian” a.k.a. “The Ministry of Truth”

4 years ago

What if someone, someone powerful and ruthless, decides its all bunkum, fuels a powerful economy with coal and raises and equips a 2 million strong army?
What do they proposes to deal with that?

Chester Draws
Chester Draws
4 years ago
Reply to  Pat

Um, China?

They deal with China by ignoring it. Blocking it from their minds.

Mind you China has the free speech thing sorted, so the rest of the threats don’t really matter.

4 years ago
Reply to  Pat

Pat, hasn’t some place already done that ? And also got approval for as many coal power stations as they like until 2040, all OK with UN.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x