Disrupted planetary health

Since the Industrial Revolution, human impact on the planet has become so active that today it has led to serious consequences, and many scientists have openly talked about the onset of a new geological epoch – the Anthropocene epoch. Gradually, from an intelligent inhabitant of the planet, man has become the cause of geophysical and biological changes on a global scale. Consumptive attitude to the Earth, unwillingness to take responsibility for destructive processes caused by anthropogenic factors led to “damage” of the planetary ecosystem of which each of us is a part.

The “Faustian thinking” of which Oswald Spengler wrote in the last century had reached the point of no measure, and man began to gravitate toward overconsumption, overconsumption, unlimited growth, unthinkable waste of natural resources. Having become a hostage of Hubris (from the Greek ὕβρις – “impudence”, “unrestraint”, “intemperance”), he turned into a greedy exploiter, believing that the planet is designed to satisfy his appetites and whims.

Air and ocean pollution, the destruction of tropical forests, the extinction of many species of living creatures on the planet, the depletion of natural resources, changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere, and overpopulation are global challenges that we must meet. Challenges resulting from, on the one hand, a lack of environmental awareness and, on the other hand, a race for economic growth. Man looks at his planet through the eyes of the owner and consumer, not realizing that he is becoming more and more like a plunderer and parasite. Approximately 83% of the landmass today is under the influence of man. Humans also have a frighteningly high percentage of organisms that photosynthesize, over 90%. We have driven a responsible attitude to the planet out of our consciousness, and the result is not long in coming.

The Kyoto Protocol does not solve the problem of global warming. We keep talking about climate change, but we are not taking effective action. We raise the issue of energy, but we don’t switch to alternative energy sources. We talk about water pollution and continue to dump 400 billion tons of waste into the hydrosphere every year. We acknowledge that 80 percent of urban dwellers breathe air with concentrations of pollutants above the WHO recommended level, but we continue to pretend that the environmental risk to our health is not so great that we finally start to sound the alarm. In the pursuit of profit, we cut down the forests, reclaiming land for another development. In one minute, approximately 20 hectares of our planet’s forests are destroyed. Humans are behind the disappearance of rare animal and plant species, the destruction of the ozone layer, the release of toxic substances into the water and air, and the emergence of new viruses with pandemic potential. The planet is sick with the “Anthropocene virus. Mankind has heard many verdicts, from the Nietzschean “God is dead!” to Spengler’s “The Decline of the West. Today, scientists are issuing new verdicts: global warming, the sixth mass extinction. We react slowly and too late, and worse, we refuse to believe in the possibility of catastrophic developments. Acclaimed scientists unanimously say that global warming poses a threat to our future that can only be compared to nuclear war, but we remain deaf. Probably, we are waiting for the average temperature of the Earth to rise by 2-3 degrees and we will have nowhere to run.

Leaders of organizations such as WHO, WWF (World Wildlife Fund) and the UN were forced to admit that the coronavirus pandemic (as well as other infectious diseases of recent years) was caused by anthropogenic influence on nature. In 1993, Norwegian physician Per Fugelli wrote: “Patient Earth is sick. Global environmental disturbances can have serious consequences for human health. It is time for doctors to diagnose the world and make recommendations for treatment.” Few took these words seriously at the time and equated “planetary health” with “human health.

Was it ever different? Did man treat the Earth with more respect and responsibility?

From ego-centrism to eco-centrism

In ancient cultures, the Earth was not only deified, but also had a name. We call our planet Earth, but we have long ceased to consider it our home, to give it reverence. The ancient Greeks, who left a profound mark on the development of humanity and influenced world culture, called the Earth Gaia (Greek Γαῖα). As you know, all the planets were named after Greek and Roman gods. Only the Earth is still without a name. It only has a name. But a name is not a name. Not only do we give names to our children, but also to the animals; indeed often we name our cars and so treat them as living beings, and children give names to their toys as a sign of real concern. So why can’t we do the same for our planet? What prevents us from treating it as a living being? What happened to our consciousness that affected our thinking so much that we clung to the body of the planet like vampires, sucking its last resources? And most importantly, what do we do now?

Those who could fundamentally change the current situation – political leaders, representatives of international organizations, heads of central banks – choose inaction or half-measures. Global environmental challenges must be discussed at events such as the G20 summit. And not just any discussion, because just stating the problem is not enough. What matters are the solutions that can influence the course of history, and what matters are the results that prevent the crisis.

The almost complete absence of actors willing to take responsibility for solving global environmental problems shows a disregard for their magnitude. Moreover, environmental problems cannot be solved without a new concept of the economy. And we are not talking about yet another project to overhaul the current economic system. Cosmetic repairs are useless where the entire building is to be demolished.

Thus, we face two global problems–environmental and economic–but the root of both is in our thinking and the value system that influences all aspects of our existence.

Today the voices of the proponents of the concept of Degrowth are becoming louder and louder: Serge Latouche, Yorgos Kallis, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and others. There are international conferences (the first was held in 2008 and included about 140 participants), cultural events (in 2019 there was an architectural Triennial in Oslo dedicated to the idea of a world free of economic growth). In September 2018, an open letter to the European Union was published. 238 politicians and scientists put forward a proposal to abandon economic growth and focus on human and ecological well-being.

Back in 1972, researchers at MIT published a report called “The Limits to Growth,” in which they warned of the dire consequences that await mankind if we do not stop economic growth. It is in this report that growth, normally seen as an extremely positive phenomenon, is seen as destructive. A consumerist consciousness that no longer recognizes any boundaries, coupled with the pursuit of profit, can lead us to a civilizational catastrophe. Today, activists in the Anti-Growth Movement propose to save the planet from exhaustion in the following ways: reduce production, reduce harmful emissions, support the development of renewable energy sources, eliminate commercial advertising, control the mindless human consumer instinct, limit working hours (and thereby give people more opportunities for creativity); some supporters of the idea speak of the need to introduce an unconditional basic income.

Political ecologist and author of Degrowth Yorgos Kallis notes: “Given the fact that our economy has been based on the concept of growth for too long, simply pulling off the stopcock will not work. In order to slow down the economy and not wreak havoc, we have to rethink the way we think about the whole economic system. This is a fair point. It should be emphasized that the noble impulse of the supporters of the Anti-Rust Movement deserves great respect, but behind it, however, there is no holistic economic system that can become not only an alternative to the existing capitalist model, but also an antidote against an entrenched system of values.

What they propose are solutions within the same economic model. The result is only possible with the creation of a new economic paradigm, which means a transition to a new financial system. It should be understood that environmental and economic problems, as noted above, have one source – our thinking. As long as man remains a consumer obsessed with greed, he will deplete the planet’s resources. Until man develops ecological awareness, he will not see the planet as a living being, but as a huge supermarket capable of satisfying all his needs. Step by step he will lead the planet to imminent catastrophe, until another deadly virus puts an end to his parasitic vanity.

Despite the emergence of a large number of environmental and economic initiatives designed to change the situation, all of them are again developed within the old paradigms. And this is their essential flaw.

When philosopher and philanthropist Hares Youssef decided to found the non-profit organization Gaiia Foundation, he set big goals for it: creating global projects that respond to the challenges of today’s digital world, aimed at protecting humans from an unpredictable robotic future, as well as setting out to protect the environment and reform the global financial system. These are a range of initiatives:

1. Ecological:

Take the initiative to name our planet after Gaiia and recognize it as a living thing (and therefore give it legal status).

2. Economic:

Create a “new economy” based on the principle of financial transparency and thus lay the foundations of a new economic paradigm. Initiate research in the interdisciplinary field of “psychonomics.

3. Technological:

Create the Gaiia Communication Platform, a communication platform that forms capital from data. GPP will be the world’s first social network, where any action carried out in absolute transparency will become an economic transaction.

4. intelligent:

Create the Gaiia Think Factory, a think tank that will include leading economists, thinkers, scientists, etc., whose task will be to solve the global problems facing humanity.

5. Educational:

To conduct interdisciplinary research in children’s education and upbringing in order to establish a Children’s Pension Fund and create a “children’s paradise” (Pideum) where the child will be given opportunities to discover his or her inner potential.

These are just some of the initiatives. Each project developed by the Gaiia Foundation involves the creation of a completely new paradigm. Neither environmental, nor economic, nor social problems can be solved unless we make the transition to a new type of thinking and recognize our planet as a living being with a name. It would be more accurate to say not to a “new kind of thinking,” but to a well-forgotten original one, for our distant predecessors knew a sacred attitude toward their Earth. And only by taking ecological responsibility, that is, by replacing ego-centrism with eco-centrism, will we cure the planet of the detrimental effects of the “Anthropocene virus.

The Right to Clean Air

Of course, there will be those who will find the idea of giving our planet a name very utopian and ineffective, but even if we take some serious measures to protect the planetary ecosystem and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, gradually switch to renewable energy sources, etc., but do not change our mindset, all our efforts will be in vain. Time will pass, and we will find ourselves at the edge of the same abyss again. This is why Hares Youssef attaches so much importance to the initiative of naming the planet and recognizing it as a living being. It is not just a symbolic act, but an attempt to awaken ecological awareness in humanity.

Our thinking becomes the source of social, economic, political and other projects. All that we have today, calculating the damage and trying to predict all the risks, is a product of our mentality. If we do not change our mentality, we will be doomed to step on the same rake.

Unfortunately, man is built in such a way that he begins to realize the value of something only when he loses it. We can sacrifice anything for a glass of water if water suddenly disappears. But we can live about 10-14 days without water, and how long can we live without air?

Hares Youssef is convinced that clean air is of the highest value, and that every living being receives the right to breathe clean air at birth. Today, however, we have lost this right and seem to be doing everything we can to arrive at a future where we will have to shorten our days under glass domes. In addition to natural air pollution, such as floods, tornadoes, forest fires, and other natural phenomena, anthropogenic factors play a huge role: the chemical industry, oil production, motor transport, non-ferrous and ferrous metallurgy, the building materials industry, and power plants.

750,000 Chinese die each year from toxic smog. India, where high levels of unsanitary conditions have led to soil degradation, emits 2,480 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. Pakistan, which ranks third among the countries with the most air pollution, is known for an increase in respiratory diseases and cancers. Experts have found that each year 40,000 children die before the age of 5 because of the harmful effects of fine particulate matter in the air when different fossil fuels are burned. The race for economic growth is costing us too much, and if we don’t stop, according to Hares Youssef, we will inevitably find ourselves under glass domes, forced to extract clean air in order to survive. The right to clean air must be included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and this is a necessary measure.

Hares Youssef says: “Throughout history, poets and philosophers have treated our planet as a Mother. Are we not, as living organisms, flesh of this super-organism? We are made of the same elements as our Mother, we breathe the same air, drink the same water. And even if we no longer consider the planet as our mother, we will always remain her children. Like fish in the ocean, we breathe her love.

We must not forget that we live in a holistic energetic living organism, being part of a common ecosystem. We do not realize that our negative influences on this ecosystem directly affect our soul. A little more and the consequences may be irreversible.

What to do and where to begin? The formation of eco-consciousness, which will completely change our attitude toward the planet, must begin by naming it Gaia, consonant with the name of the ancient Greek earth goddess Gaia, the creator of all life. Gaia is the soul of our planet. By giving the Earth a name that will become a symbol of Mother, we will move on to a new stage of our development. We, as a human species, will stand one step higher in relation to ourselves.

The ground you walk on is Gaia’s skin, and your activity is, in a way, a massage. You must realize that your well-being and your health is a mirror of Gaia’s health. Gaia feels like the leaves on the trees that respond to the quality of the air, the corals that measure her temperature. Gaia drinks water with her breathing soil, she absorbs the foul rain from the mining pipes, the oil refineries and steel mills, the mills and factories, whose frenzy comes from insane greed. frenzy of greed. Have you not yet understood that your illnesses are symptoms of Gaia’s affliction? Have you not yet been able to connect the cause of your unknown diseases with the result of your unbridled economy? Has the coronavirus not shown you the character of Gaia?”