Editorial: Crying freedom

There is a certain unreality about watching footage of extreme heat conditions, wildfires and the like, while trapped in our soggy summer here. But we are fortunate not to be experiencing the life threatening extremes, whether of heat or of storms and floods, that appear to be afflicting so many parts of our planet. 

Despite all the measurements of raised temperatures, and the evidence of their effects, there remain those who deny that climate change is even taking place, and/or that modifying human behaviour can affect its course. One danger is that such voices will attract more of an audience as governments bring in the measures deemed necessary to reach net zero targets, with consequent impact on our lifestyles. 

Recently we have seen something similar with other environmental measures. A campaign against the London low emissions scheme has brought apparent electoral success, and politicians as a result are playing to the motoring lobby in an attempt to shore up their support, offering second thoughts on measures designed to restrict traffic in residential neighbourhoods. 

An undercurrent in much of this is “freedom”. The freedom to use our cars to get about; to travel as we wish; in broad terms, to live our lives without interference from the state. But freedoms that depend on one’s means are not shared equally; further, the less well off you are, the more vulnerable you are likely to be to the effects of climate change, though it would be dangerously naive for anyone to assume that they will be able to avoid these effects. 

Some in the financial world are indeed predicting that the global warming for which we are currently on track will bring a dramatic economic downturn, with the risk of a collapse of asset values bringing drastic consequences both for those of working age and those by then on a pension. 

Undoubtedly we must always be on our guard: our freedoms can easily be degraded, subtly or more blatantly. As Thomas Jefferson said, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” But freedom is also easily invoked in support of dubious causes, and the freedoms included in the Human Rights Convention are expressly balanced by the rights of others. 

On the necessary measures to tackle the climate crisis, we can see that before long there will be difficult questions to answer in relation to balancing individuals’ lifestyle choices with the needs of humanity and a habitable planet. There will always be arguments over what is needed – and what is workable – to achieve the latter, and what restrictions are justified as respects the former. The political climate is also heated, which makes reaching any degree of consensus all the more problematic. But on such fundamental questions it is hard to see a way forward unless governments are seen to be both grasping the issues and reaching out to build the necessary momentum for change.