SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
chuga chuga chuga chuga chuga chuga.... The global rise of authoritarianism is weakening climate governance just as warming accelerates and tipping points draw near. This failure now poses a direct threat to our future. Authoritarianism is stalking nations and global institutions, often allied with climate scepticism and denial. This has weakened climate governance, most notably in the United States. In Russia and the Middle East oil and gas producers, climate denial-and-delay and authoritarianism co-mingle. And climate barely rated a mention at Davos this year. Authoritarianism is undermining climate action – and time is running out
China, the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, is a complex contradiction. China produces over 80 per cent of the world’s solar panels, 60-70 per cent of wind turbines, and three-quarters of energy storage batteries, and accounted for approximately 60 per cent of all new global renewable energy capacity installed globally in 2024. Last year, China added more new capacity across all energy technologies than India’s total capacity as of the end of 2024, and the generation capacity China has added since the end of 2021 is larger than the entire US energy system. Renewables lead the growth in energy supply in China, but 78 gigawatts of new coal was also added in 2025. Oil production is projected to be flat to 2050, but gas will increase more than 60 per cent from 2020 to 2050, while coal use will remain high till 2030 then decline sharply to about 30-40 per cent of current levels by 2050. Thirty-two fossil fuel companies were responsible for half of the global carbon dioxide emissions in 2024 and state-owned fossil fuel producers made up 17 of the top 20 emitters. All 17 are controlled by countries, in the main authoritarian, that oppose a proposed fossil-fuel phaseout. All of this is very challenging and has direct implications for climate action. Yet the rise of authoritarianism means the globalisation cargo cult is on the wane. The World Trade Organization was no match for Trump’s tariff assault. These abrupt changes open up some possibilities. The era of neo-liberalism and economic globalisation has eroded democratic politics. Now, the rise in nationalist politics has brought down the curtain on unfettered globalisation and the illusions that global institutions (such as the IMF, World Bank and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, for example) have delivered on their promises. There have been 30 global climate policy-making COP conferences since 1995 – where petrostates have veto power – and the rate of warming has just accelerated by half. Many nations had abandoned the right to determine their economic future and handed huge power to global corporations, facilitated tax avoidance structures, failed to regulate the finance sector and enabled institutions such as the World Trade Organization. Global governance organisations have been hypocritical and selective in wielding power. Neo-liberalism’s fetish with market efficiency, deregulation and lower taxes has weakened the role of governments, and produced an unprecedented redistribution of wealth to the elites at the expense of everyone else. This has been the major breeding ground for political resentment amongst the working poor, and for the rise of authoritarianism. It is now clear that, as bankers and economists such as Ross Garnaut and Nicholas Stern and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney have recognised, the inability of markets to fully assess the risks of, and respond adequately to, the threat of climate collapse is the greatest market failure in history. Governments must take the lead in correcting this huge economic distortion. There is an opportunity for governments to assert the right, and necessity, of their role in defending our future by courageous leadership and incisive interventions, before it is too late. By abandoning failed global mechanisms and coercive controls, there is a new chance for nations to forge bilateral and regional agreements on climate action and other issues that reflect much higher ambition, rather than lowest-common-denominator compromises. The Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney referred directly to this moment for middle powers in his Davos speech. Like-minded countries can make real progress on climate mitigation by putting a climate focus on trade and security arrangements. Actions such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism in Europe, and proposals for a climate-first foreign policy, as proposed by the Australian Security Leaders Climate Group (ASLCG), are examples. So, too, is the growing movement for a high-ambition fossil-fuel phase-out alliance amongst like-minded nations, which sprung from the failure of COP30. The ASLCG has proposed a climate-first foreign policy grounded in an emergency response, with a “commitment to deep cooperation with nations that prioritise climate disruption risks, with climate-focused agreements on tax, trade, technology, finance, equity and the like” and “diplomatic leadership in high-ambition alliances, such as agreements to phase out fossil fuel subsidies and international financing, to phase out the fossil fuel economy, and for economic climate mobilisation." Global heating is accelerating, with the past three years averaging above 1.5°C, driven by a reduction in sulfate aerosol emissions due to clean-air policies, and a related cloud feedback. The Earth’s climate could be more sensitive to greenhouse gases than the central estimates, and warming is currently tracking the highest-emissions scenario. This would bring 2°C well before 2050 and 3°C around 2070. On this path, 4°C by 2100 is feasible. Many extreme events and their impacts have been underestimated in climate models. Risks include climate-driven inflation and big economic shocks, and mass displacement and death. We are in the danger zone where multiple climate tipping points are being triggered, some of which accelerate warming and worsen impacts. Thus there is a point of no return, after which it may be impossible to stabilise the climate close to conditions in which human society can be maintained. This risk is now, and requires immediate action to avoid it. The nature and the proximity of catastrophic impacts, tipping points and abrupt and cascading changes constitute the climate emergency. This requires governments to make actions to prevent climate breakdown the first priority of economics and politics. There is a new opportunity for middle powers to step up, and for governments to lead, in the face of climate threats of a scale that now makes civilisational collapse a realistic scenario. When societies face existential threats, they can act fast – as we see in wartime mobilisation, disaster recovery, pandemics and economic reconstruction. In democratic nations, these responses often harness public institutions, cross-party mandates, and mass civic participation not only to speed action, but to preserve legitimacy and fairness under pressure. In these moments, governments have suspended normal timelines, restructured economies, and coordinated resources at massive scale to achieve national objectives. Emergency mobilisation is not about panic but about priority and activating all available capacities toward a common goal, removing bottlenecks and bypassing market failure. Emergency mode is a shift in governance, mindset, and tempo. It replaces fragmented reform with coordinated transformation. The tools exist. The capacity exists.
What has been missing is the decision to act. _Climate emergency briefing: Impacts, risks and key actions for Australia in the age of authoritarianism_ is published today by the Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration.
AS MENTIONED BEFORE WHAT DO NOW WON'T TAKE EFFECT IN ANOTHER 50 YEARS OR SO... BUT IF WE DON'T DO NOW WHAT HAS TO BE DONE, THE TREND WILL ACCELERATE AT A FASTER RATE....WHICH MEANS REACHING HIGHER TEMPERATURES BEFORE THE CARBON GETS SEQUESTRED INTO COAL AND OIL.... THE SYSTEM IS ALSO COMPLICATED BY THE OCEANS RISING...
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.
Gus Leonisky POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
|
User login |
noise....
Noel Turnbull
Climate sceptics dominate the noise, not the numbersDespite political denial and media distortion, majorities in Australia and the United States accept climate change is real, human-caused and demands action.
Climate change may be nonsense, a giant conspiracy, a fraud and other things to people like Donald Trump and Tony Abbott – but it’s not to the American public – nor the Australian one.
Recently the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University published a major report – Climate Change in the American Mind: Beliefs & Attitudes.
The report found that Americans who think global warming is happening outnumber those who think it is not by a ratio of more than 5 to 1 (72 per cent versus 13 per cent). However, 85 per cent of Americans either underestimate how many Americans are worried or don’t know enough to say.
This is hardly surprising giving the barrage of misinformation coming from the White House and fossil fuel lobbyists. They don’t get much help from the media either, as only 17 per cent of Americans say they hear about global warming in the media ‘at least once a week’. This is the lowest percentage since the question was first asked in 2015.
A majority are aware that global warming is mostly human-caused and 64 per cent are somewhat worried. Some 31 per cent think global warming is affecting the weather in the US – that includes 12 per cent who think weather is being affected a lot.
In Australia the Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub has been undertaking a wide variety of research for some years.
The Monash research is not directly comparable to – and is older than – the George Mason research. But the results are staggering to say the least.
Its research has found that since 2011 Australians are increasingly alarmed, less disengaged, and less doubtful, but with little change in dismissive attitudes regarding climate change, according to an analysis based on a survey of public beliefs and attitudes.
In 2022 (the latest attitudinal research on the Monash website), 31 per cent of Australians said they were alarmed about climate change, increasing from 14 per cent in 2011; 27 per cent of Australians are concerned about climate change, decreasing from 31 per cent in 2011; 23 per cent of Australians are cautious about climate change, decreasing from 27 per cent in 2011; just 2 per cent of Australians are disengaged with climate change, down from 6 per cent in 2011; 9 per cent of Australians are doubtful about climate change, decreasing from 15 per cent in 2011; and, 9 per cent of Australians are dismissive about climate change, only 1 per cent higher than in 2011.
The research found that women were slightly more active on climate change than men. Overall, more women reported taking action on climate change than men. While similar proportions of men and women reported taking ‘a great deal’ of action, more men reported taking no action than women.
A more recent (2025) Ipsos study provides an updated view on Australians’ attitudes towards the global climate crisis and the transition to net zero emissions. It undertook the study in 32 countries.
More than half (56 per cent) of Australians agreed that if individuals don’t act now to combat climate change, we will be failing future generations.
Agreement with the statement has been steady over the last three years, following a sharp drop in 2022. Australia was lower, however, than the global country average which was 64 per cent across 32 countries. Concern was greatest in the Philippines (82 per cent), Indonesia (81 per cent) and Mexico (80 per cent).
More than half of Australians (56 per cent) also believe the nation should do more in the fight against climate change. Again, this is in line with 2024, but down marginally on 2023 (60 per cent) and below the global country average of 62 per cent.
Like many countries around the world there is limited belief in Australia that the government has a clear plan in place for how it, businesses and the population are going to work together to tackle climate change.
Only 28 per cent of Australians surveyed agreed we have a clear plan, whereas 34 per cent disagreed, with the remainder uncertain. Australia again was worse than the global country average of 32 per cent.
Interestingly, our belief in the government’s commitment to tackling climate change has been somewhat volatile; it is higher than last year (24 per cent) after declining from 30 per cent in 2023 and 37 per cent in 2022, which was a sharp rise from 29 per cent in 2021.
https://johnmenadue.com/post/2026/02/trump-and-abbott-way-out-of-step-with-voters/
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.