Apartheid = Mudança Climática?

Não sou muito fã do bispo da Igreja Anglicana, Desmond Tutu, ele é muito, vamos dizer assim, Nações Unidas, para mim. Com todos os defeitos do politicamente correto e do esquerdismo da ONU.

A última dele foi igualar a necessidade do passado em combater o apartheid (variável sempre usada contra inimigos) com a (suposta) necessidade de hoje em combater o aquecimento global.

Para Tutu, é fato pacífico que há aquecimento global e que o culpado são os gases de efeito estufa, portanto tudo que emite estes gases, empresas e carros, deve ser eliminado. Não há nenhuma consideração ao fato de que há 17 anos não há aquecimento global e que a própria ONU, no último relatório, reduziu muito as suas previsões de aquecimento (depois de errar muito).

A mudança climática serve como palco ao bispo, que sempre me pareceu gostar muito de holofotes.

Vejamos o que diz Desmond Tutu no jornal inglês The Guardian

Throughout my life I have believed that the only just response to injustice is what Mahatma Gandhi termed "passive resistance". During the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, using boycotts, divestment and sanctions, and supported by our friends overseas, we were not only able to apply economic pressure on the unjust state, but also serious moral pressure.

It is clear that those countries and companies primarily responsible for emitting carbon and accelerating climate change are not simply going to give up; they stand to make too much money. They need a whole lot of gentle persuasion from the likes of us. And it need not necessarily involve trading in our cars and buying bicycles!

There are many ways that all of us can fight against climate change: by not wasting energy, for instance. But these individual measures will not make a big enough difference in the available time.

People of conscience need to break their ties with corporations financing the injustice of climate change. We can, for instance, boycott events, sports teams and media programming sponsored by fossil-fuel energy companies. We can demand that the advertisements of energy companies carry health warnings. We can encourage more of our universities and municipalities and cultural institutions to cut their ties to the fossil-fuel industry. We can organise car-free days and build broader societal awareness. We can ask our religious communities to speak out.

We can actively encourage energy companies to spend more of their resources on the development of sustainable energy products, and we can reward those companies that do so by using their products. We can press our governments to invest in renewable energy and stop subsidising fossil fuels. Where possible, we can install our own solar panels and water heaters.

We cannot necessarily bankrupt the fossil fuel industry. But we can take steps to reduce its political clout, and hold those who rake in the profits accountable for cleaning up the mess.

And the good news is that we don't have to start from scratch. Young people across the world have already begun to do something about it. The fossil fuel divestment campaign is the fastest growing corporate campaign of its kind in history.

Last month, the General Synod of the Church of England voted overwhelmingly to review its investment policy in respect of fossil fuel companies, with one bishop referring to climate change as "the great demon of our day". Already some colleges and pension funds have declared they want their investments to be congruent with their beliefs.

It makes no sense to invest in companies that undermine our future. To serve as custodians of creation is not an empty title; it requires that we act, and with all the urgency this dire situation demands.

(Agradeço a indicação do texto de Tutu ao site Weasel Zippers)