Destroying Planet Earth: Geoengineering is the Ultimate Hubris, without Democratic Control
Feb 23, 2014 | Global Research | Dr. Vandana Shiva
Supporters of geoengineering have proposed
radical ways to alter the planet. But opposition is growing to
geoengineering. We interviewed the indian environmentalist, scientist, philosopher Vandana Shiva.
Vandana Shiva, originally a theoretical
physicist, she now campaigns the world for heirloom seeds, organic
farming and local food systems instead of the chemical- and
oil-intensive large scale industrial farms that destroy the environment
and wreck local economies. She also supports Hands off Mother Earth, a
citizen-based organization that resists geoengineering .
Vandana Shiva was interviewed by Maria Heibel from NoGeoingegneria
TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERVIEW
NoGeoingegneria: So, first, thank you very much for your time because
you’re an incredible woman and you always have so much time for
everybody. and it’s great. We wanted to speak a little bit about
geoengineering with you. It’s something that embraces everything: food
and water and what is happening now in the world in a situation of
climate change, and great change, and risk of collapse at every level. I
saw the interview you had with Amy Goodman. So, first, what is, for
you, at this moment, the role of geoengineering?
00:55 Vandana: the role of geo-engineering should, in a world of
responsibility, in a world of scientifically enlightened decision making
and ecological understanding, it should be zero.
There is no role for geo-engeneering. Because what is geoengineering
but extending the engineering paradigm? There have been engineered parts
of the earth, and aspects of ecosystems and organisms through genetical
engineering: the massive dam building, the re-routing of rivers. These
were all elements of geoengineering at the level of particular places
and we have recognized two things: one, that when you don’t take into
account the way ecological systems work, then you do damage.
Everyone
knows that in effect climate change is a result of that engineering
paradigm. We could replace people with fossil fuels, have higher and
higher levels of industrialization, of agriculture, of production,
without thinking of the green-house gases we were admitting, and
climate
change is really the pollution of the engineering paradigm, when fossil
fuels drove industrialism. To now offer that same mindset as a solution
is to not take seriously what Einstein said: that you can’t solve the
problems by using the same mindset that caused them. So, the idea of
engineering is an idea of mastery. And today the role that we are being
asked to play is a role based on informed humanity.
2:45 NoGeoingegneria: In my eyes geoengineering started in the 50s
with atomic tests, because in this period they started to make
geoengineering of the atmosphere of earth in a global sense, in a bigger
sense, and a lot of projects in the 50s started to organize the earth,
the planet, in a new way, with a new idea of engineering really the
whole planet. With the power of atomic bomb scientists made a shifting
in their mind, in my eyes. So in this period, in the 50′s weather
modification also started very energically. It is part of geo
engineering, and you have here the map of the ETC group, in the whole
world, they are doing it, and you cannot do local modifications without
changing the whole system. I know in India, in Thailand, and Australia
weather modification maybe is more discussed, more open than in Europe.
For example in Italy they made weather modification in the 80′s and
people don’t know it. What do you think about the role of weather
modification in a sense of geoengineering for food, for water, for the
whole system?
4:21 Vandana
Weather modification is a very small part of geo engineering.
Geoengineering right now is the hubris of saying: “all this climate
change, and we’re living in the anthropocene age and now human beings
will be the shapers of our future, that totally control the overall
functions of not just our planet, but our relationship with other
planets, so many of the solutions offered have been putting reflectors
in the sky to send the sun back as if the sun was a problem rather than
the very basis of life, or to put pollutants into the atmosphere in
order to create a layer of pollution that would stop the sun from
shining. But the instability of the climate that is the result of the
greenhouse effect will just be aggravated by these interventions. Now
weather modifications done in a narrow-minded way, to say “we are not
getting rain so let us precipitate rain artificially so that agriculture
doesn’t fail” is something that for example the Chinese did for the
olympics. They made sure there would be no rain during the Olympics. It
is a lower level of hubris than the larger project of geoengineering.
5:47 you know this map…..?
5:49 Vandana yes of course i know Etcetera.
5:52 N: and you see that the ETC Group also published only a part,
it’s only a part because everyday something else is coming out, in the
whole world they are doing it, so if you make in a lot of points.
6:07 V: it’s not too much the points
6:08 N: what does it mean for weather extremes for example?
6:11 V: the first thing is it creates more instability, and we are
dealing with instability, therefore we must deal more with actions that
create insurance against instability, rather than aggravating the
instability. It’s like I’m driving a car and I know there’s a precipice
there, I should put the car in reverse and then turn into another
direction. What geo engineering is doing is saying “let’s put our foot
on the accelerator”. And the precipice is climate instability, climate
unpredictability. And at the root of it is the false idea that these
silly little actions will be able to control and regulate the weather
and climate. But the second most important part of why geo engineering
is so so wrong is that is ultimate expression of patriarchal
irresponsibility. Patriarchy is based on appropriating rights and
leaving responsibility to others. In this case the scientists who are
playing these games, the who are investors financing it, are all doing
it without having any consent for these experiments, any approval for
these experiments, locally or globally, and worse, without thinking of
the consequences or what it can lead to, and without ever ever being
bound to responsibility. Therefore it is the ultimate expression of all
the destructive tendencies of patriarchy.
7:50 N: Yeah, and you see you can take one name Edward Teller. He
comes from the atomic bomb. He had the idea of controlling the weather
by atomic bomb. He proposed the shield for sun radiation management, so
the same persons, the same power structure is organizing this type of
management of the planet and of space. So, you know about the intention
of control ….?
8:22 V: Well for some people the intention is really one of making
others suffer. And therefore aspects of geo- engineering are about links
with military warfare. How do you alter the climate so that you can
just make rain fall or fail in a particular area and let agriculture
suffer. But in other cases, even if there isn’t that military intention
of harm to the other there is an ignorance…..
8:56 N: There is also economic interest ……
8:58 V: Not all, the reason that there is such a battalion of scientists behind it…..
9:00 N: You know oil and not soil, the food and water …….
9:05 V: The people are pushing it have a money interest. The people
who are pushing it have a military interest. , people are pushing to
have a military interest. The players merely have the arrogance that ” I
have the solution”. And it’s the combination of stupidity combined with
the arrogance of the little players, and the evil projects of the ones
who control it, that combination is what makes it toxic. Because if the
scientific community could only recognize its responsibility to society
and the planet and say “I will not be part of your games”, which is how
Scientists for Social Responsibility was created, which is how the group
that started to monitor the whole nuclear issue, those were all
scientists. This is a marriage of stupid scientists with evil minds, and
we need scientists with responsibility to be the counterforce to say
this is not science, just as we need in genetic engineering. And it is
as the community of scientists who really know the science start to
speak more and organize better, that the stupid scientists of the
biotech industry will quieten down. And biotech and geo engineering have
the same mindset, of engineering, of power, of control, of mastery of
nature
10:30 N: you spoke also of the dams. It’s big geoengineering also in
India and in the whole world and there are now the big interests of
water and here, the last time we had an interview with Pat Mooney he
said that big dams, energy production, water control, and weather
control, it’s one thing. So it’s not only a small intervention to have
crops. It’s something more.
11:06 V: No as I said it’s the ultimate hubris, that’s what it is! Hubris on a planetary scale!
11:19 N: Uh….. what do you think about the fact they will spray nano particles? That’s the program!
11:29 V: Each of these issues has a particular aspect thats different
but i think those particular aspects are very small compared to the
overall damage and the overall irresponsibility. For me the first issue
is, how dare you do this. How dare you. That has to be humanity’s
response. Then the rest of the little thing of how nano particles can
harm or have too much sulphur in the atmosphere can harm, those are
specific details but this is a civilizational issue. And in
civilizational issues you don’t look at the tiny details as the debate.
You have to look at the big picture!
Transcript by lukinski&trishy
Vandana Shiva
Vandana Shiva, a world-renowned environmental
thinker, activist, physicist, feminist, philosopher of science, writer
and science policy advocate, is the Director of The Research Foundation
for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy. She serves as an
ecology advisor to several organizations including the Third World
Network and the Asia Pacific People’s Environment Network.
In 1993 she was the recipient of the Right Livelihood Award,
commonly known as the “Alternative Nobel Prize”. A contributing editor
to People-Centered Development Forum, she has also written several works
include, “Staying Alive,” “The Violence of the Green Revolution,”
“Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge,” “Monoculutures of the
Mind” and “Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution, and Profit,” as well as
over 300 papers in leading scientific and technical journals. Shiva
participated in the nonviolent Chipko movement during the 1970s, whose
main participants were women. She is one of the leaders of the
International Forum on Globalization, and a figure of the global
solidarity movement known as the anti-globalization movement. She has
argued for the wisdom of many traditional practices, as is evident from
her book “Vedic Ecology” that draws upon India’s Vedic heritage. Shiva
has fought for changes in the practice and paradigms of agriculture and
food. Intellectual property rights, biodiversity, biotechnology,
bioethics, genetic engineering are among the fields where Shiva has
contributed intellectually and through activist campaigns. She has
assisted grassroots organizations of the Green movement in Africa, Asia,
Latin America, Ireland, Switzerland and Austria with campaigns against
genetic engineering. In 1982, she founded the Research Foundation for
Science, Technology and Ecology. Her book, “Staying Alive” helped
redefine perceptions of third world women. Shiva has also served as an
adviser to governments in India and abroad as well as non governmental
organisations, including the International Forum on Globalisation, the
Women’s Environment & Development Organization and the Third World
Network.
