Enlightened Behaviour

It came as a surprise to me to discover this week that knitted, multi-coloured, stripy socks, with the big toe separated from the rest so that they could be worn with sandals, were invented by the Ancient Egyptians. It is not clear, however, whether those who wore them then were associated, as they are nowadays, with fashion dyslexia, disparaged alternative lifestyle practices, or both – despite the rational case for this perfectly practical and hygienic mode of footwear. Later, while walking in town, I looked for practitioners of the socks-and-sandals combo so that I could nod my head at them in silent approval. There were none.

There were, however, plenty of Jehovah’s Witnesses proselytising in their usual manner, silently proffering leaflets to passers-by: and pass-by is just what I did. Though I am sometimes tempted to stop and challenge their dogma, past experience has proven that it is futile. They believe absolutely in their particular interpretation of god-given ancient scriptures. No discussion is possible from any other starting point. The Enlightenment passed them by – as it did the Mormons, a Christian sect founded on the ‘divine revelations’ experienced by the 17 year-old Joseph Smith (an acknowledged drinker) in 1823. A brief analysis of the account of his mystic experience would lead a rational thinker to the conclusion that the boy was sleep-deprived and delusional, or high on drink and/or drugs, or that he was a liar and a con-man. One can only despair at the fact that, because of the propensity for humans to think and behave irrationally, the Enlightenment has made limited progress since it kicked off in the 17^th century. Jehova’s Witnesses still believe the end of the world is nigh, despite several previously predicted deadlines having passed without incident.

Now, however, there is an alternative warning of Armageddon – not promulgated by prophets, but credibly forecast by scientifically collated data. The U.N. has announced that global warming of the order of 2C will certainly cause the end of the world as it is currently constituted. No vengeful god is responsible. No righteous peoples will be spared. No prayers will affect the outcome. The only way out of the dilemma is for the human population to moderate the economic activities that are at the root of this potential calamity. Disaster could be averted by reasoned and bold action, but time is of the essence. Governments must act, and act now! The problem is, however, that they will not. Governments just aren’t very proactive. Leaving aside those run by tyrants or infested with self-enriching, corrupt politicians, even the cleanest, most democratically elected governments tend to champion policies promoted by lobby groups and act on fears of losing the next election. Momentum for change must come, as it always has, from individuals acting and influencing others, until their number reaches critical mass and obliges politicians to follow suit.

So the onus is on each and every one of us to take action to reduce our carbon footprints. This is a difficult sell, since we who live in rich countries have become accustomed to the throwaway society, the over-consumption of goods and the luxury of placing convenience over necessity – all things to which populations in poorer countries aspire. Still, it is the sum of billions of small things that can make a difference. We don’t all have to become vegetarian but we do all have to eat less meat. How hard is that? My guess is that it becomes easier as awareness and practice spread, establishing new behavioural mores. Sooner or later, neighbours will frown on your eco-unfriendly car(s), friends will encourage you to switch to green energy and avoid profligate consumption. Eventually, those alternative lifestyle pioneers may be awarded belated recognition for their commitment to change. By their socks-and-sandals shall ye know the true saviours of mankind.