climate change protest
(Image: AAP)

How do we collectively accept the strong indications of climate catastrophe? While the signs might be increasingly grim, some Crikey readers aren’t prepared to lay down and let the inevitable occur; there are still steps that can, and must, be taken. Elsewhere, Crikey readers discussed Christopher Pyne and post-ministerial jobs, and the need for tax justice.

On handling the climate catastrophe

Alex Murray writes: It may well be the case that catastrophe is coming. Despair and futility are cheap responses. We’re in the position we’re in because humanity collectively abdicated responsibility and continued along the easiest path to a significant degree. It takes effort and will and maturity to act as though there’s hope and purpose when all the signs around you tell you it’s futile. We all have the responsibility to do what can be done and to fight to save what can be saved. None of us are entitled to the shameful comfort of cynical told-you-so we’re-all-fuckedism, however easily it might come.

Mark Gibson writes: So we are looking at a range of outcomes from “very bad” to “off the dial bad”. The problem in our media culture is that the benchmark for apocalypse is whether tradies may have to give up their utes. So any bad prediction immediately calls up inevitabilism: once the utes have gone, what point is there talking of further gradations? What needs to be communicated is that “very bad” is still a whole lot better than “off the dial bad”.

On Christopher Pyne’s new job

Robert Smith writes: If Pyne’s new position is not contrary to the so-called “code” it says a lot about the code.

Peter Wileman writes: It was always on the cards that Pyne would be exactly where he is now. My next thought is that nothing will come of our cries of outrage because there have been too many before Pyne. And why would pollies vote to cut off this lucrative avenue at the end of their “service” to the public.

Mark Hipgrave writes: It would be good if someone could ask Morrison what sort of post-parliamentary employment would not be acceptable under his interpretation of the guidelines.

On tax justice

Richard Shortt writes: Ah, tax; the dirty word of Australian politics. I see Australia as a country with very high social expectations (for great infrastructure, defence forces, hospitals and public services) but also as a country where no one wants to pay for them. An interesting dilemma. And now, as I age, I watch my demographic of “boomers” breaking upon the shore of unprepared, under-funded and soon to be overwhelmed health and aged care systems. And yet, still, tax is a dirty word and everyone wants to pay less.

Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and cock-ups to [email protected]. We reserve the right to edit comments for length and clarity. Please include your full name if you would like to be considered for publication.

Peter Fray

Help us keep up the fight

Get Crikey for just $1 a week and support our journalists’ important work of uncovering the hypocrisies that infest our corridors of power.

If you haven’t joined us yet, subscribe today to get your first 12 weeks for $12 and get the journalism you need to navigate the spin.

Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey

JOIN NOW