Vaclav Havel: The Planet is not at risk. We are

Over the past few years the question has been asked ever more forcefully whether global climatic changes occur in natural cycles or not, to what degree we human beings contribute to it, what eventual threats stem from them and what can be done to prevent them.

If we are at the beginning of serious global climatic changes, as scientific studies demonstrate, and if there is a threat of changes to temperature and energy cycles on a planetary scale, it could mean a generalized danger irrespective of the area of civilization people belong to or the continent they live on. It is also obvious from published research that human activity is also one of the causes of change; we just don’t know how big its specific contribution is. Is it really necessary to know it to the last percentage point, though? By waiting for confirmation, for incontrovertible precision, aren’t we simply wasting time when we could be taking measures that are relatively painless compared to the ones we would have to adopt in the event of further delays?



Maybe we should start considering our sojourn on this Earth as a loan. There can be no doubt that for past hundred years at least, the Euro-American world has been running up a debt, and now other parts of the world are joining it and following its example. However, we have entered an era in which nature is issuing us warnings and demanding that we not only stop the debt growing but, on the contrary, start to pay it back. There is little point in asking whether we have borrowed too much or what would happen if we postponed the repayments. Anyone with a mortgage or a bank loan can easily imagine the outcome.



Estimates of the effects of possible climatic changes are hard to gauge. Our planet has never been in a state of balance, from which it could deviate through human or other influence, and then, in time, return to its original state. The planetary organism cannot be regarded as some kind of pendulum that will return to its original position after a certain period. The climatic system has evolved turbulently over billions of years and the energy flows represent a gigantic, complexly interlinked structure of networks, and of networks within networks, where everything is interlinked in diverse ways, one part being dependent on the next. One of its characteristics is that the structures will never return to precisely the same state they were in fifty or maybe five thousand years ago. They will probably evolve into a new state, which need not necessarily mean any threat to existence, so long as the change is only slight. Larger climatic changes, however, could have unforeseeable effects within the global ecosystem. Were that to happen and were the pessimistic forecasts to come true, we must ask ourselves whether human life would be possible in the new conditions. And precisely because so much uncertainty still reigns, a great deal of humility and circumspection is called for. We can’t go on endlessly fooling ourselves that there is nothing wrong and that we can go on cheerfully pursuing our consumer lifestyles, ignoring the climatic threats and postponing a solution. Maybe there is no danger of any major catastrophe in the coming years or decades. Who knows? But that doesn’t relieve us of responsibility toward future generations.



I don’t agree with those whose reaction to the possible threats is to warn against the restrictions on civil freedoms. Were the forecasts of certain climatologists to be fulfilled, our freedoms would be tantamount to the freedom of someone hanging from a twentieth-story parapet.



We live in a world ringed by a single global civilization comprising various areas of civilization. Most of them these days share one thing in common: technocracy. Priority is given to everything that is calculable, quantifiable or ratable. That is a very materialistic concept, however, and one that is drawing us toward an important crossroads for our civilization.



Whenever I reflect on all the various problems of today’s world, whether they concern the economy, society, culture, security, the ecology or civilization in general, I always end up confronting the moral question whether this or that is responsible or acceptable. The moral order and its wellspring, our conscience and responsibility, as well as human rights and the right to human rights, these are the most important issues at the beginning of the third millennium. It is necessary to return again and again to the roots of human existence and confront our sojourn on this planet with the prospects of the centuries to come. We must analyze everything open-mindedly, soberly, unideologically and unobsessively, and project our knowledge into practical policies. Maybe it is no longer a matter of simply promoting energy-saving technologies, but chiefly of introducing ecologically clean technologies that can be incorporated into the natural cycle, of diversifying resources and of not relying on just one single invention as a panacea.



I’m also skeptical about whether such a complex problem can be solved by one single branch of science. We cannot rely on mere technical measures and regulations being able to bypass or take the place of responsibility. Economic instruments and legally stipulated limits are all important of course, and they must be used and implemented. But equally important, however, is support for education, ecological training and ethics, in other words, a consciousness of the commonality of all living beings and an emphasis on shared responsibility.



We will either manage to achieve an awareness of our place as humankind in the living and life-giving organism of our planet, or we will face the threat that our evolutionary journey will be set back thousands or even millions of years. That is why we must take this issue very seriously and see it as a challenge to behave responsibility and not as an anticipation of the end of the world. The end of the world has been anticipated many times in the course of history and has never happened, of course. And it won’t happen this time either. We have no need to have fears for our planet as such. It was here before us and most likely will be here after us. But that doesn’t mean that the existence of the human race might not be at serious risk. As a result of our endeavors and our irresponsibility the climatic system on this Earth could end up in a state in which there would be no place for us. If we drag our feet, the scope for decision making – and hence for our individual freedom – could be considerably reduced.