Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to Oxford Lecturer Kate Guy, President Trump “blindsiding” allies with Coronavirus travel bans and his focus on taking care of the USA proves we are not ready for the coming climate disaster – but we could “rebound” with “more solid” global security and cooperation.
Coronavirus shows we are not at all prepared for the security threat of climate change
April 16, 2020 12.28am AEST
Kate Guy, PhD Candidate and Lecturer in International Relations, University of OxfordHow might a single threat, even one deemed unlikely, spiral into an evolving global crisis which challenges the foundations of global security, economic stability and democratic governance, all in the matter of a few weeks?
My research on threats to national security, governance and geopolitics has focused on exactly this question, albeit with a focus on the disruptive potential of climate change, rather than a novel coronavirus. In recent work alongside intelligence and defence experts at the think-tank Center for Climate and Security, I analysed how future warming scenarios could disrupt security and governance worldwide throughout the 21st century. Our culminating report, A Security Threat Assessment of Global Climate Change, was launched in Washington just as the first coronavirus cases were spreading undetected across the US.
…
An uncoordinated response
…
While traditionally a great power like the US might step forward to direct a collective international response, instead the Trump administration has repeatedly chosen to blindside its allies with the introduction of new limitations on trade and movement of peoples. This mismanagement has led to each nation going on its own, despite the fact that working together would net greater gains for all. As the New York Times’s Mark Landler put it, the voices of world leaders are forming “less a choir than a cacophony”, leading to mixed global messages, undetected spread, and ongoing fights over limited resources.
…
We can treat the current global crisis as a sort of “stress test” on these institutions, exposing their vulnerabilities but also providing the urgent impetus to build new resilience. In that light, we could successfully rebound from this moment with more solid global security and cooperation than we knew going into it. Decision-makers should take a hard look at their current responses, problem-solving methods, and institutional design with future climate forecasts like our Threat Assessment in mind.
…
Read more: https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-shows-we-are-not-at-all-prepared-for-the-security-threat-of-climate-change-136029
What are they teaching in universities these days?
There is nothing wrong with different countries implementing varied responses to the Chinese Coronavirus, or any other global crisis.
Imagine if the world had embraced a completely unified response, and granted the incompetent United Nations World Health Organisation had been granted absolute power for the duration of the crisis. The WHO wanted open borders and free movement long after Trump closed the US border. And talk about lack of focus; a senior WHO advisor wants recovery money to be spent on renewables.
A variety of disconnected responses to Covid-19 means multiple opportunities to get things right, instead of putting all the eggs in one basket. Nobody knows what the right response is, but with a variety of different responses, everyone can observe what is working in other countries, and what mistakes they made, and copy the best of what other people are doing.
At Oxford it sounds like the elite are convinced they can
find the right solutions to problems. They seem to think they have a
duty to impose them on us. Their solutions are correct. Other
solutions must be wrong and should be ignored or silenced.
Can we have a quick straw poll of those in the UK that want to ditch Brexit and go all the way with WHOever?
Streuth in Oz you can’t even cross State borders without good reason and then you have to self quarantine for 14 days. As for leaving the big smoke like Sydney for the holiday home down the coast or wherever the locals don’t want you either so welcome to the great global kumbayah. What on earth are these stinkers in residence smoking?
Typical Liberal illogic.
They were presented with compelling evidence that individuals (in this case – Nations run by a leader looking out for the interests of the People who put him in office) working each for their own good, much like capitalism for individuals, is the best way to compete and optimize outcomes. Like capitalism, such a system does have disadvantages, but the advantages far outweighed the negatives. So with this nationalitic friendly competition so everyone ultimately wins. But then to cite success as a reason to do the opposite?
The Libtards claim to reach the opposite conclusion, a conclusion counter to their own cited evidence that collectivism is the solution called for.
Liberal illogic from just more Libtards.
“And talk about lack of focus; a senior WHO advisor wants recovery money to be spent on renewables.”
I’m pretty sure that’s a feature, not a bug.
Globalists, just like every other flavor of leftist, engages in subterfuge to disguise their actual agenda. They don’t really believe that some over-arching “one world government” would be more effective or efficient at anything, they just know that it would grant the people running the show (they assume it would be themselves) the power to enact their agenda at will. It’s worth millions of deaths (actually could also be considered a feature rather than a bug considering that many of these people consider humanity a blight upon mother Gaia) in a global pandemic if it means that they get to run the world and decide for us little people what we can eat, where we can live, what (and whether) we can use for transportation, how much power we can use etc, etc, etc.
The WHO and most of the United Nations corrupt groups prove we don’t need global governance. What we need are leaders who look after the interests of their own nations.
That’s how a free market economy works, too. Self interests and competition drives better governance.
The MINUSTAH (United Nations Stabilisation Mission in Haiti) brought an awful cholera epidemic in Haiti. That had to do with shit holes (no the ones President Trump was allegedly talking about… possibly).
I don’t think the UN is the right tool to fight epidemics.
“What are they teaching in universities these days? ” ANS: BORG mentality, collectivism, authoritarian rule…governmental babysitting.
What isn’t coming in education? Critical thinking, independence, personal responsibility,…
The WHO’s willful negligence in service to China is more proof corrupt global governance would be a disaster for all but the ‘elite’, so globalist puppets claim the opposite, even still-breathing puppeteers chime in – you can almost hear him salivate…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coronavirus-pandemic-will-forever-alter-the-world-order-11585953005
he Coronavirus Pandemic Will Forever Alter the World Order
By Henry A. Kissinger
excerpts:
“The U.S. must protect its citizens from disease while starting the urgent work of planning for a new epoch.”
“Now, in a divided country, efficient and farsighted government is necessary to overcome obstacles unprecedented in magnitude and global scope.”
“Leaders are dealing with the crisis on a largely national basis, but the virus’s society-dissolving effects do not recognize borders.”
“No country, not even the U.S., can in a purely national effort overcome the virus. Addressing the necessities of the moment must ultimately be coupled with a global collaborative vision and program. If we cannot do both in tandem, we will face the worst of each.”
“While the assault on human health will—hopefully—be temporary” Threat?
“Failure could set the world on fire.” Threat?
“At this writing, there is no cure.” False. Hydroxychloroquine whether you like it or not.
The climate has always changed and will continue to.
There is no climate emergency except the emergency of those wishing to
get rich by creating the image of a problem which they alone can solve