An old codger's comments

Global warming, resulting in climate change is, or should be, at the top of the list for politicians. But because of lobbying by large companies dealing in fossil fuels and the reluctance of governments to antagonise voters who are employed by these industries, the issue is set aside or, despite irrefutable scientific evidence, is reframed as an endless debate. The driving force of global warming is the progressive accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is the result of the burning of fossil fuels – coal, petrol, gas, and the removal of trees and other plants which sequester carbon. But there is a cause which precedes these – overpopulation. There are too many humans in the world and they are using the electric power produced by burning the fuels and felling trees to produce more food. So one way to solve the climate problem would be to stop any further increase in the numbers of people born.

Another prior cause is poverty. Poor people burn cheap fuels, usually wood, to cook and keep warm, and aspire to become affluent and use electricity. They also have more children than the well-off families as they are needed for work to ensure their survival and contraceptives are expensive..

But there are yet other prior causes which receive little or no attention. Firstly Capitalism, which believes solely in the continuous economic growth of societies without counting the cost to the environment, and Religion, of many varieties, with belief in the sanctity of the family unit and its primary importance to produce children. Capitalism is responsible for global warming by encouraging the mining and burning of more and more fossil fuels: Religions for denying its adherents control of their fertility and encouraging the uncontrolled breeding of more and more children.

Climate change cannot be controlled through paying attention to just one cause – the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere, but only by an awareness and control of the other causative factors

I doubt anyone in the western world, even the whole world, will not have heard of the deposing of President Trump in the USA by Joe Biden. There was a great sigh of relief from many people that the narcissistic, lying, ex-TV star had been beaten in the election. The immediate problem is to persuade the man who hates losing to accept that he has lost. But there is an even greater problem – to persuade the 70 million who voted for him to forget his promises and accept that he is not going to lead them to the promised land.

Populist leaders engender passionate commitment in their followers and it takes some time until they realise the anointed one is not going to solve their problems. The Trump presidency has not been long enough for disillusion to set in, so there will be many who will feel cheated in losing their leader. How does a true believer accept the new situation if they believe ‘He was sent by God’ as some claimed?

In some ways the aftermath of this election is similar to the period following the death of Hitler. He engendered passionate devotion in many Germans, who were prepared to overlook his evil actions and beliefs as he claimed he was leading them to a ‘better future’. How did the millions of convinced Nazis cope with the failure of the Third Reich and the ignominious death of their beloved leader? I have yet to understand how a mindset of uncritical belief can be rapidly converted into acceptance of a new normality.

Such situations, where large numbers of followers replace critical thinking with unwavering belief and devotion, have been common in human history, and are often the birth of religious movements and cults. The error is in thinking, and then believing, that another particular human, who has all the usual human flaws, knows the answers to all of one’s individual problems. False prophets will always be with us; so how do we overcome the human need to adulate them?

The view that vaccinations are harmful and should be avoided has emerged fairly recently. The belief seems to coincide with several other anti-establishment and anti-technology attitudes, such as the 5G phobia. To a veterinarian, scientist and, I hope, clear thinker, the belief is irrational. The science of vaccination is well-established and widely proven and I have no wish to reverse what has been achieved over the past century in the control of infectious diseases either in humans or animals. However, given the passion of the anti-vaccers it is worth pointing out a few of the salient facts in the argument.

Firstly, the proponents of this belief are mostly healthy young or middle-aged people. It is likely that they were vaccinated against all the common diseases as children, as their parents would have been intensely interested in their survival and welfare. For example, the horrors of the polio epidemic are still remembered by the older generation – there are many who still bear the disabilities of the infection, and the development of the polio vaccine was welcomed with great relief.

Secondly, although the anti-vaccers may claim their superior immune systems, and the ingestion of various vitamins, minerals and other ‘wellness’ remedies, will enable them to cope with any infection they come into contact with, they forget that they are also protected by the 80% of the population who are vaccinated. With a high level of immunity in the community, diseases have difficulty in spreading. The 20% of refusers benefit and survive because of the behaviour of the 80% of rational citizens.

Thirdly, I presume that, because of their beliefs, the anti-vaccers will refuse to vaccinate their children, thereby reducing the overall level of immunity in the community over time, and if the beliefs persist, endanger further generations. Given the importance of Public Health, and the safety of others, it would be rational to insist that all children are vaccinated against the common childhood diseases before they are allowed to attend pre-school and primary school. Adults can refuse to protect themselves, but the community cannot allow vulnerable children to risk becoming infected and to endanger the health of their peers.

It’s a pity we cannot transport the anti-vaccers back to the 17th and 18th centuries to experience the misery of unchecked infections, disabilities and premature deaths. We have come a long way since then, and no rational person would want return to those conditions.

‘We like it long‘ they say. ‘You look more distinguished‘. I am not so sure. Having lived a lifetime with short hair, it is a new experience for me to have to cope with long flowing locks. Previously, over many years, my instructions to the barber were concise: ‘Number 4 all over, thanks‘ And I would sit back and let him/her mow the grass, knowing the result would be short and sweet. Easy to keep clean, and ‘professional’, or so I thought.

My hair style coincided with my previous choice of ties. When employed in veterinary practice in the UK, and especially agricultural practice, it was considered essential to wear a tie – probably to show farmers one was a ‘professional’. Another aspect of the class structure I presume. Anyhow, sporting a long dangling tie, while working at the rear ends of cows, risked having it regularly anointed with nasty stuff, so I graduated to bow ties. None of those poncy clip-on excrescences, but genuine ones which I tied myself. My collection of bow ties was something to be proud of and, I thought, added a certain flair to my professional presentation. Needless to say, short hair also contributed to my clean and lean appearance. And even after moving to New Zealand, where the standard uniform of farm vets is shorts, an open neck shirt and gumboots, and then in Australia, I kept my hair short.

But along came the corona virus epidemic and it all changed! First the hairdressers stayed closed, and even later when they were allowed to reopen I was risk averse and continued to pass their doors without stopping, even though I could see my hirsute visage reflected in their windows. I have not had a haircut since February and am now blessed with a long mane that reaches to the base of my neck. I flaunt my locks at the other balding oldies and pretend that it takes youthful vigour to grow such luxurious hair. Call it the Trump approach, while knowing his is a wig.

But now what? Before, I was in control and my coiffure was simple; now I have a small jungle to control and there are questions for which I have no answers: Do I get it cut at some time? And when? And how? And in the meantime would it look better in a ponytail? And then I have to cope with the positive comments of my female ‘admirers’. Decisions, decisions. Perhaps I should just give in, accept my ‘mountain look’ and become an artist or poet. I might even get a couple of tats.

I managed to cope without a car for seventeen years, but having moved to the Blue Mountains, a car became necessary, perhaps essential. In addition, as I had managed to survive to the age of 85, I had to undergo a driving test. What a fuss! It was so much easier (and cheaper) when I used public transport. Let’s deal with the driving test first. I drove around the back streets of Katoomba doing all the right things with respect to signalling, speed limits etc….and failed. Apparently those double continuous white lines are not to be crossed, so at T-junctions I was judged deficient because in cutting the corners I crossed the lines. One is supposed to make 90 degree turns at crossroads. Luckily, we oldies are allowed a few goes at passing the test, and I did so at the second attempt. Yearly licensing after 75 is also dependent on passing a medical examination which includes tests of mental integrity: Spell ‘world’ backwards for example.

The second hurdle was registration. We registered Jane’s car after we bought it, but failed to remember it was only for 6 months. The last time I owned a car the rego disc was attached to the windscreen thereby providing a daily reminder of the due date. So 7 months later, I suffered being pulled over by police and informed the car was not registered or insured, thereby incurring a big fine. This was when we learned for the first time about the colourful paper world of pink, green and blue slips.

By this time my enthusiasm for owning a car had receded considerably, but it had to happen. So I started on a quest to find something suitable. I was looking for a used car as my funds were limited. Have you considered how many makers and makes of car there are? It’s overwhelming. And there are so many aspects to consider: size, year of manufacture, mileage (the term is still used), servicing, tyres and so on. Does one buy from a dealer (extra cost) or privately? And having decided what type of car is needed, and one is for sale, how far is one prepared to travel to see it?

And then there are the ‘car experts’ to cope with. Friends who ‘know about cars’ and warn you about all the pitfalls of buying a used car. I wouldn’t get one of those if I were you. They are heavy on petrol OR You can’t get spare parts for them. Why, you could have that 10-year old BMW with electric seats for the same price. AND Have you looked at the Red Book to see what it is worth? That was first sold in 2011, you do know they changed the model in 2012? And so on. It is easily possible to spend days on the internet just looking, without making any progress. Some people revel in knowing all about cars, and how best to buy and sell them. The whole topic bores me witless. I am still without a car.

Most local and state governments employ so-called ‘Town planners’, but I wonder what they achieve. Let’s take one city as an example -Sydney. Present population around 2 million and increasing. Each year more agricultural land is acquired to build new houses and the area covered by the city continually expands. Soon it will reach all the way from the sea to the foot of the Blue Mountains and extend even further up and down the coast. Question: Is this process unlimited? Will the expansion be allowed to continue indefinitely?

As the city perimeter increases, the need for all kinds of public services expands, at a higher rate than the increase in population. Radial roads lengthen, become motorways, and need more and more cross-links; public transport extends and becomes more complex; more schools and hospitals are needed with reasonably close access; more complex reticulation of electricity, water, gas and broadband is necessary, more police, libraries, social services, shops, parks, sports fields and so on. Where does it end? Do town ‘planners’ actually plan, or do they lamely follow suggestions of the land developers, mortgage brokers and real estate agents?

The population of Australia will continue to increase through migration for some time to come. This appears to be essential for the growth of the economy, a belief which in itself needs further thought, but little attention seems to be paid to where all these extra people will go. Surely there needs to be a limit to the size, and to the costs involved, of expansion of the major cities in this country. How many more soulless suburbs comprised of regimented rows of boring houses on tiny plots along featureless straight streets do we need?

Many country towns are shrinking and the average age of the remaining residents is increasing. This is where new Australians should be going. Put a limit on further expansion of the cities and encourage the development and expanded settlement of country towns. They need new housing and city-style facilities; they need more accommodation for doctors and nurses, lawyers and teachers; they need extra residents with new skills and ideas; they need the assistance of younger people capable of doing the more demanding agricultural jobs. Please don’t allow them to be dumped in the outer suburbs of cities without opportunities or mobility, and vulnerable to prejudice and crime. Come on town planners, how about some progressive planning?

I have been singing all my life, sung in several choirs, and even composed a few songs, so I can claim some knowledge in the topic of this blog. A song, I believe, and traditionally, comprises words and a melody. The message may be profound or banal, a love poem or a protest, but the two basic components, melody and lyric, make a song.

What’s your problem? you may ask. Well, having listened to many contemporary ‘songs’ on the radio or TV, I have failed to recognise either a melody or a lyric. In many cases it is impossible to hear the words because the backing music is too loud, and often there is no melody. Even when the words are audible, too often they consist of a single phrase repeated many times. This is not a lyric. It may be appropriate for chanting at a street protest, but it takes more than a few words shouted over the background sounds to constitute a song.

And as for the music, all too often it consists of noise rather than a melody. It seems that much of the accompaniment for modern ‘songs’ is produced electronically and added as layers to get the right ‘mix’. Dominating the layers is the output of a drum kit.

So, my impression of many modern ‘songs’ is that they are not really intended to be sung, or for the lyrics to be understood, but to provide an accompaniment/excuse for dancing. This is the Cicada season here and the air is full of their music – more noise than melody, but the message is clear!

For the first blog on this site I have chosen to comment on communication. In my lifetime there have been giant leaps in the methods by which we contact other people. Before and just after WW2 there were only two ways one could communicate privately over a distance. Overlooking the use of carrier pigeons, there was the letter and the telephone. The latter was for instant dialogue and the former for slower and more measured messages. Of course there was one-way communication via public radio, with no means to make a response. Amateur radio enthusiasts could talk to each other, but needed to understand how to set up and maintain the technology. Regular and reliable two-way radio contact was confined to the armed services. In fact, there are still only two ways to communicate – voice and message, involving the abilities to listen and to read. Some may claim that showing and sharing pictures is a way of communicating, however this involves not only seeing, but also interpretation. Do you always understand the message in a cartoon? Do you listen to all the dialogue on TV?

Now, in 2020, the opportunities to communicate are overwhelming. But is society better off because of the extra systems? Are we more in touch with the needs and feelings of others? Is the public better informed? Is it more difficult to promote and distribute falsehoods and dangerous beliefs? Unfortunately, the reverse is true. The media is a bubbling cauldron of unscientific nonsense, conspiracy theories, celebrity trivia and useless advertisements. And despite all the interaction babble, we are more isolated and there are more lonely people.

Let’s take just one aspect of the mess: texting. If one wants to communicate at a distance with another, the easiest and quickest approach is to telephone. In the past you picked up the receiver, dialed the number and, provided your friend was available, talked to them. Now, for some unknown reason, the majority of the public spend much more time creating and reading messages on mobile phones. Wherever one looks in public spaces, people are head down, texting. The efficiency of voice to voice contact has been replaced by the delay involved in writing and sending messages. Progress?

Given the above criticism of modern technology, you may well question why I write blogs, without my being aware of whether the messages are being read or understood – a sort of one-way conversation hoping for a listener! The answer is that I enjoy the writing, and if someone appreciates what I have written, that is a bonus. So I will keep on keeping on.

As you may know already, I write two other blogs: Renaissance not Retirement (henryhenrycollins.co) and A vet’s view of the human animal (avetsview.co), which I have persisted with for several years, despite there being only a few regular viewers. These blogs cover serious topics and if you investigate them you will find included a short description of my background, so I will not repeat it here. However, at this stage of my life, I am acutely aware of the many inconsistencies and contradictions in society and I am greatly tempted to write about them. If this new blog amuses some readers, offends others and, above all, leads to fresh thinking on these topics, I will have succeeded. So here goes…..