Democracy is failing the climate crisis

Billionaire activism reveals the failure of Australian democracy

[ad_1]

The structures of democracy must change in order for the world to overcome crises such as climate change, writes Dr Helen Camakaris.

As the Federal election in Australia draws near, each major party is attempting to court the public. They are almost all focused on winning the numbers.

Like most of us, politicians are swayed by emotive reasoning and suffer the many Defects of evolutionary mismatchThey are therefore more interested in short-term goals, such as re-election and pursuit of status.

As always, the lynchpin of the Coalition’s electoral policy involves pork-barrelling in marginal electorates, targeting the hip pocket nerve with a short-term fistful of dollars (or longer-term if you are wealthy and qualify for tax breaks) and claiming superior financial management, even when there is scant evidence.

And not just Basil Fawlty’s refrain, “don’t mention the war”Morrison has used the zeitgeist for war to his advantage as a plus point for the Liberal Party. It’s more a case of “shhhh! Don’t mention the climate!”

Labor, on the other hand, is trying to sell improved aged care. This is an appropriate response. Royal Commission’s 2021 recommendations, improved Medicare and cheaper child care. They have at least a plan to combat climate change with their Australia policy: Powering Australia, slated to reduce emissions by 43 per cent by 2030 and put us on track for net-zero by 2050, in line with Australia’s Paris commitmentsThis will allow us to increase employment in renewable energy while simultaneously reducing our carbon footprint.

In Australia, climate policy is a major problem, despite the fact that we are extremely vulnerable to the climate’s impacts. We are facing severe disruption from worsening droughts and floods, bushfires. heatwaves, rising sea level, ocean acidification, cyclones.

And the consequences are considerable: loss of livelihoods, food shortages, flooded cities, increased morbidity and mortality, refugee migration, and probably border disputes and possible wars.

Over the past two decades in Australia, the political rabble has deposed responsible leaders on both the left and right, fearing that the public is too unsophisticated to consider any issue not immediately evident as serving self-interest.

We are now considered a pariah state because climate change has been downplayed. Our international responsibility cannot be ignoredWhile we work towards climate action, we also lose out on the opportunities Chances to move early.

While some countries have done better than us, we collectively fail to meet the challenge.

Climate scientist Michael Mann emphasized this.:

“We are not yet on a path to keeping warming below a catastrophic 3° F.”

He also noted that the “obstacles aren’t technological; they are political”.

Yet, the majority of people still see climate change as a major threat. This is evident in a 2021 UN Global poll: 1.2 million people in 50 nationsAccording to the survey, two-thirds of people considered climate change a global emergency.

What is the point of failing to implement a good policy? What happened to “Government of the people, by and for the people“, surely an ideal shared once with the U.S. for which it was written? In many countries, democracy is in decline.

Current democracies ignore this fact: majority of voters sit in the political centreOur current partisan system does not serve them well. In the same way, future citizens and those living outside of our borders are often ignored.

At least two changes are necessary: firstly, we must move away from adversarial jousting between left- and right-wing ideologies, to seek meaningful representation and consensus; and secondly, we must tap into the specialist knowledge necessary to comprehensively understand issues like climate change from all angles: scientific, social, psychological, political, economic and ethical.

There are many models of democracy that could produce better outcomes for issues like biodiversity, climate change, and an economy that places people and the environment above profit. Popular movements and think tanks have suggested this. National unity government, eco-socialism, citizens’ assemblies or juries direct democracy.

But few people have ever addressed the core problem: How can a new model possibly be created?

A government-sponsored independent could make interim decisions regarding long-term, global issues such as climate change, and even the nature of democracy. Council for the Future that includes experts in science, economics, political theory, foreign policy, international law, psychology and ethics.

They could jointly design policy on solving climate change, which could then be put before the government or a citizens’ assembly for a conscience vote.

Climate policy would be at arm’s length from politics, much as happens with the Federal Reserve in the USA and the Reserve Bank of Australia with respect to monetary policy.

Consensus would encourage long horizons and continuity of policy, providing certainty for business, saving billions of dollars and facilitating international negotiations. We might even embrace the Mariana Mazzucato articulates moonshotOr the Kate Raworth’s doughnut economy.

A controlled transition without conflict is the challenge of any substantive change in politics. However, a council for future would tick many boxes.

One strategy is to promise a council for future as part an election platform. The public is keen to see progress on “wicked problems” and could well support a party with a strategy that might allow us to secure a safe future for our children.