The root of Clive Hamilton's "thought" on geoengineering appeared more 
clearly in this interview.   

When discussing the fact that The Heartland Institute and the American 
Enterprise Institute have endorsed geoengineering as a solution for the 
problem they have denied exists more emphatically than anyone else on the 
planet, Clive said:  

"They see it*—see geoengineering as a way of protecting the system, of 
preserving the political economic system, whereas others say the problem IS 
the political and economic system, and it’s that which we have to change*."

And later in the interview, after Clive states that the risks to 
civilization that scientists such as David Keith and Alan Robock are 
concerned about are one thing, i.e. "*scientific risks*" whereas Clive sees 
an additional factor, which he calls "*political* risks", he says this: 
 [edited to make my point clear]

"*the danger that geoengineering becomes...  ...a way of protecting the 
political economic system from the kind of change that should be necessary"*
*
*
A way to interpret this is to say Clive wants our system of economic and 
political relationships as they exist* to fail* to cope with climate change 
in order that civilization will change in ways he thinks will make it more 
likely that the changed civilization will survive for a longer term. 
Another way to say this is he wants everyone in civilization to realize 
there is no way forward without a fundamental reordering of our political 
and economic relationships with each other, which is a necessary precursor 
to fundamental change.  

In "Green" philosophy, this lines up with those who say anything that 
allows this civilization to continue, such as discovering how to mitigate 
acid rain back in the 1980s for instance, is not the good thing it appears 
on the surface, because it merely allows the civilization to exist a bit 
longer which allows it to expand to a larger size, enabling it to do more 
damage to the planetary life support system, allowing it to take more of 
the rest of life on Earth with it as and when it collapses. 
 Geoengineering, even removing CO2 from the atmosphere, in this line of 
thought, is therefore something to be opposed.  

If this is the root of Clive's "thought", it would throw some light on why 
he has taken the position in his Nature 
piece<http://www.nature.com/news/no-we-should-not-just-at-least-do-the-research-1.12777>,
 
i.e. "no, we should not do the research" [into geoengineering].  

On Saturday, May 25, 2013 1:12:10 AM UTC-7, andrewjlockley wrote:
>
> http://m.democracynow.org/stories/13653
>
> Democracy Now!/  MON MAY 20, 2013/  Geoengineering: Can We Save the Planet 
> by Messing with Nature? 
>
Amy Goodman interviews Clive Hamilton with some recorded clips of Shiva, 
Dyer, Keith, etc.  
 

>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to