I have no argument with Greta Thunberg’s message or the protests by thousands of children calling for action on climate change. But I do resent the implication that my generation has neither been aware of the problem nor tried to do something about it for the last fifty years. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I grew up in the 1970s and the need to protect the environment was pressed on me at an early age. As a child in primary school, we were often hauled out of the classroom and trooped across the local nature reserve to observe and identify the creatures and plants living there. We were taught about the fragility and beauty of nature. We poked and prodded it and drew pictures of the things we saw. Our mini-safaris into the jungle on our doorstep taught us to care.
It was a message reinforced by constant exposure to nature programmes and back then, with only three channels on the television, they were impossible to ignore. David Attenborough told us about life on Earth and we watched its wonders unfold week after week. We saw how life was inter-connected. We were taught how we had evolved. When he disported with the gorillas, we recognised they were not so different from us and he made us aware how vulnerable they were to both poachers and habitat loss. We watched, we listened, and we didn’t think the safety of the natural world was somebody else’s problem.
We were told, in no uncertain terms, everything would go horribly wrong if we didn’t look after our world. To that end, we picked up litter, we grew plants, and we made habitats for our local wildlife. We came to believe that most forms of hunting were wrong.
During my childhood, we were made aware of the threats to tigers, elephants and other rare creatures and we knew they would go extinct if we didn’t save them. I remember joining the World Wildlife Fund and ploughing my pocket-money into animal-themed gifts for Christmas and birthdays.
I remember news stories about Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth (both founded around 1971) and the Save the Whale campaign (1975). I remember pandas being very important. I remember seeing film of the Torrey Canyon disaster and the pictures of birds covered in oil and hoping it would never happen again.
And I remember, even in primary school, collecting silver bottle-tops and returning empty bottles; a habit that’s become full-scale recycling. We were aware, even then, that the world’s resources are finite. I remember taking the ‘Keep Britain Tidy’ campaign very seriously and it shocks me when I see children walking past my house shedding sweet and crisp packets like shoes and socks at bedtime.
We were very aware that the air we breathe is the only air we’ve got. When the hole in the ozone layer was discovered in the late 1970s, it wasn’t treated with contempt, as some of the current campaigners seem to believe, but acted on. We stopped using CFCs. We bought a new fridge. It’s thanks to us that lead was banned from petrol and the air in our cities is slightly less hazardous to our lungs.
We did make a difference. There are only six coal-fired power stations left in the UK and the landscape is now dotted with wind-turbines and solar panels.
As I said, it annoys me that the younger generation seems to believe we did nothing when we were their age and they’re the first to care for the environment. We tried our best. But where we failed, the current protests will also fail.
It’s very telling that the first response of the British government to children leaving the classroom and going out onto the streets to protest was not ‘we must listen to them’ but ‘they should be in school’ – as though they were playing truant and should be soundly thrashed for their impertinence.
At best, there’s a condescending attitude, like a parent’s half-hearted attempt to sound enthusiastic about a macaroni portrait they’ve just been presented with. ‘Very nice, dear – but have you done your homework?’
Greta Thunberg can glare all she likes at the president of the United States but he won’t take her seriously. He doesn’t believe the evidence and the more you try and push a man like that, the more he’ll dig his heels in. For him, this is a political argument – more laws mean more government interference and that goes against his republican values.
And it also goes against the will of the big corporations whose only duty is to make sure they pay the least amount of tax. It doesn’t matter to them if the ice over the oil fields of the North Pole disappears – in fact, many would be quite pleased. More oil means cheaper plastics, cheaper goods and more profit. If those plastics end up in the sea, what does that mean to them?
I’m sorry to say the campaign against climate change will not be won by children. I think it’s all a little bit like the children’s crusades of the thirteenth century. While I doubt if any of the protesters will be sold into slavery, I feel their enthusiasm will not be matched by success. Nobody is going to be converted by their beliefs. To the heathens like President Trump, there’s too much money involved to worry about coral dying in the Pacific Ocean or a few polar bears losing their icebergs. To many of the older folk, like me, they’re preaching to the converted.
If we’re going to avert a climate disaster, we need better politicians – ones with their roots in morality rather the current crop. And for that to happen, we need to have a better selection process – one that doesn’t rely on a handful of party supporters who pay to make sure their candidate does what they want rather than what’s necessary. If the children want to make a change then they should learn how to grow their own party for when then they’re eligible to vote.
Commentaires