Back in the old days ... a reflection on growth vs. existence

Back in the late 1970s, when I was studying engineering at Uni, I started arguing that (urban and industrial) developments should only be allowed to proceed if they retained - or later returned - the agricultural potential of that land. 

I wasn’t actually wanting to protect agriculture: I wanted to protect and respect the natural world - our environment, and the only way I  could come even close to “selling” the idea was to frame it in terms of the “thinking” of the dominant worldview at that time, which was develop-develop-develop - a world view in which, appallingly, an untouched wilderness was viewed as a waste waiting to be “developed”. 

A lot more people now understand that such views are inherently wrong (some purely out of concerns about the climate crisis - which, valid though those are, FAIL to understand that wilderness has an inherent right to exist in and of itself), but too many of those who hold power do not.

Back then, in the late 70s and early 80s, I was contending over the environment with one Shire Clerk in a small regional Queensland town in particular who insisted that any consideration of environment be reduced to a very, very, VERY cut-down assessment of economic costs (and many of my assessments were deemed ridiculous by that IPOC and cut down to something that was both farcical and insufficient to restrict growth). 

I was also fighting against architects over houses without verandahs or even eaves, as the architects said “oh, just use air conditioning”. My arguments against unnecessary use of power lacked the impact of warnings based on GHG emissions (although I started using that in the late 80s, when I became aware of it), and arguments based on the costs of power were trivialised along the lines of “oh power's not expensive and never will be!”

Well, nearly half a century later, power is prohibitively expensive, the world is waking up to the inherent  importance of the natural world and - belatedly - the importance of Indigenous  knowledge and practice, and development at all costs is being challenged - sometimes successfully.  

But we still tend towards being dismissive - or resist even properly acknowledging of problems vehemently or even violently. The threat of nuclear weapons never went away, despite many assuming the end of the Cold War meant that; not only has the COVID-19 pandemic not  gone away, we have warnings of where future pandemics could come from; and too many people in power are still being reactionary or ensuring their agents look after their interests (although not all). 

We cannot afford to be dismissive of any of our existential threats - nuclear, pandemic, climate  crisis, or others known (including human rights) or, as yet, unknown. 

It is hard (mentally and emotionally) to give up dreams and reframe one’s life - effectively, and to deal  constructively with living under ongoing threats, fears, and uncertainties, but people - such as those in war zones or living with poverty or discrimination - do it, and we all should share that burden and work together, as we have done before and can do now, and as young people are showing us can be done now. 

But now, unlike half a century ago when I started on this, we have no time to lose.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• the natural world is valuable in and of itself;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider: 

• we do also need to consider the valid needs of humans, who are also a natural part of the natural world, but big flashy houses and an addiction to economic growth are NOT valid needs;
  
• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”.