The more I learn about complex systems, the less likely it seems that the current, incremental approach to climate mitigation could work. It's as if, during the financial emergency in 2008, governments had said "we'll supply the bailout money at 2% a year between now and 2050".
The financial sector would have collapsed many years before the rescue package was complete. To push the system back into a stable equilibrium state before it reached its tipping point, governments had to act immediately and decisively.
We don't know how close Earth systems are to their tipping points, but some of them could be very close. If these systems are approaching their critical thresholds, the only relevant action is sudden and drastic.
We might well have reached the Lehman Brothers moment: the point at which the whole thing could go over the brink if we don't move with great speed and effect to push it back into a safe space. Yet governments are responding as if they had all the time in the world.
Either our governments don't understand how complex systems work, or they are pretending not to. But they are treating this emergency as if they are dealing with a simple system, like wash basin: water in, water out, turn down the tap a little and the level falls.
Complex systems are fundamentally different from simple ones. They behave in completely different ways. The methods required to prevent disaster in a complex system are entirely different from the methods required to prevent disaster in a simple one.
They understood this when Lehman Brothers failed. Why don't they understand it now? Why were they prepared to go to extraordinary lengths to rescue the financial system, but completely fail to grasp what needs to be done to rescue our life support systems?
Is it because the climate, unlike the banks, doesn't fund their campaigns for re-election? Is it because oceans and rainforests can't lobby them? Are we to face the prospect of systemic environmental collapse because averting it doesn't appeal to their immediate self-interest?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's happening in front of our eyes: the stifling of democracy in the UK, with even more dictator's powers being slipped into the Police Bill. Yet the entire Establishment looks the other way. We must fight this as if our lives depend on it. They might. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Parliament should be in uproar. The press should be in uproar. Yet you could hear a pin drop. There have been roughly as many stories in the UK press about Nestlé’s Quality Street chocolates as there have been about this massive attack on democratic rights.
Opposition is left to a few peers in the House of Lords, Liberty, alternative news sites and protesters coming together under the #KillTheBill banner. There’s a demonstration in London this afternoon:
I’ve just finished my book Regenesis*: feeding the world without devouring the planet. I followed some astonishing people, read over 5000 papers, and questioned everything I believed to be true. The results, I think, are revolutionary. Published by @PenguinUKBooks in May.
Thread/
I hope this book transforms our relationship with what we eat and with the living planet. What I’ve stumbled across has radically changed my understanding of our crisis and the possible solutions. We’ve made some terrible mistakes, but there are also some wonderful opportunities.
I don’t want to get my hopes up, or yours, as they might be wrong. But two of the expert reviewers who read it for me used the exact same words: “the Silent Spring of the 21st Century”.
I don’t have to look far to see how much trouble the left is in, because I’m confronted with it almost every day.
Here’s a brief thread about my experience, and why we urgently need to get over ourselves and unite against our common threats.
In February 2020, I was asked on the BBC who I supported for Labour leader. I hadn't given much thought to it. I’ve never been a member of any party, and none of the candidates inspired me. I said something nice about Lisa Nandy, partly because no one else had mentioned her.
Almost every day since then, I’ve been attacked for it. It is flourished, on Twitter and elsewhere, as evidence that I’m an evil traitor. Here’s today’s iteration.
This should be all over the front pages. The government's terminating our right to protest, through amendments sneaked into the Police Bill at the last minute.
It's the biggest assault on democracy in 70+ years, and hardly anyone seems to know.
My column theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Obviously, the Free Speech Union and all the other Freedom Warriors of the right are up in arms about this massive truncation of our liberties.
It's amazing isn't it, that they get so wound up about what students say, or about having to wear face masks, but say nothing about the biggest attack on civil liberties in the UK for at least 70 years. You could almost imagine that the only freedoms they believe in are their own
When you count the 250,000 believed to disposing of waste illegally, the networks ripping off the elderly and vulnerable, the money launderers in the City, the modern slavery ops in agriculture, beauty salons etc, how much of the UK workforce is engaged in criminal activity?
What we're witnessing in this country is almost complete regulatory collapse, driven by successive governments slashing what they call "red tape", alongside massive reductions in the budgets of regulatory agencies, whose monitoring and enforcement capacity has fallen off a cliff.
"Leave it to the market", they say. But when you leave the market to regulate itself, those who prosper are the spivs, the corner-cutters, the chancers and the outright criminals. Deregulation allows them to undercut their more conscientious competitors.
Misinformation on matters of public health kills people.
This is what happened when tobacco companies denied or downplayed the dangers of smoking.
This is what’s happening today, as unvaccinated people struggle for breath in intensive care units.
Thread/
Disease control measures are matters of political choice, and it is entirely legitimate to debate them. We can argue over how best to balance freedom from the disease with freedom from the disruptions and curtailments used to contain it.
But we must do so without spreading misinformation. False claims, ranging from “the virus is a hoax” to “the vaccines are untested” or “the vaccines are more dangerous than the disease”, are lethal. Those who spread them contribute to the deaths of others.