Climate Fanatic Goes Too Far

Back in my policing days during my time in the police academy, they taught us that as a police officer, your life is most important, then your partner’s, then members of the public. That’s not being cruel or mean. This makes perfect sense in that if you are incapacitated or killed, then you’re of no use to anybody. Obviously, you can’t help somebody if you’re dead.

Two years ago, Gregory Andrews was the High Commissioner to West Africa, where he was responsible for promoting Australia's oil and gas projects. Now he is a climate activist on the lawns of Parliament House, 15 days into a hunger strike protesting the lack of government action on climate change. For the last two weeks or so, he has only consumed water with some salt.

The reason for his protest, in his own words, “Climate change is no longer a future emergency. The science shows there's no more time left. The world is entering climate collapse and Australia needs to act.” He basically is demanding that the Australian Government ceases subsidising fossil fuels, and commits to phasing out coal and gas exports, among other things.

In response to how his body handling it, he said, “My body is starting to deteriorate. I have a tight chest and my breathing is laboured. My brain isn't as good as it usually is. And for some reason my arms and legs are aching.” Despite this, he said he is planning to continue until at least December 13th, another 27 days away, to align with the UN’s COP 28 climate talks in Dubai. If he goes another 27 days, he will be dead. This is not an act of dissent. This is an act of fanaticism. And that brings me back to my police analogy. If as a police officer, you die, then you can’t help or save anybody. It’s of utmost importance that you stay alive. What does Mr Andrews hope to achieve in his death? He has to be pragmatic here. If his goal is to save the planet, he can’t do that if he’s dead.

Some might argue that his death would bring awareness to the “climate emergency”, but isn’t everyone already fully aware of this? I mean, regardless of whether you agree or disagree, aren’t we all aware already?

Secondly, again from a pragmatic standpoint, does he honestly believe that the Government will change its actions because of his hunger strike? I know what the Government’s line is on this. They will not negotiate with individuals. They will correctly point out that Australia is a representative democracy where decisions are made by Members and Senators in Parliament. If the Government capitulate, if the Government give in to his demands, well we all know the result. Every other fanatic in the country will pitch a tent on the lawns of Parliament House and go on hunger strikes for a whole host of other things. Make meat illegal! Ban cars! Free houses for everyone! No, the Government are simply not going to give in to his demands. Either Mr Andrews gives up, or he dies. I don’t want that, but if he keeps going, that’s what’s going to happen.

The saddest thing of all this is that Mr Andrews has two dependent children and a wife. If he dies because of this hunger strike, he has just created a widow, he has just left two children fatherless, and he has not made a lick of difference to the climate. Is it really worth it?

FORMER SENIOR LIBERAL GOVERNMENT ADVISER GREGORY ANDREWS IS 14 DAYS INTO A HUNGER STRIKE FOR CLIMATE ACTION
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-15/gregory-andrews-hunger-strike-climate-change-outside-parliament/103107416

MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn