Why is life so cruel for some?

This blog post was prompted by my wife's recent concern at the distress of a stray dog searching for food and water, which unfortunately is a common sight where we live in Turkey.  We don't know the circumstances but I guess the poor creature never had much of a chance.  Life's lottery is of course a reality for all species on this planet, including humans.  Those who suffer unduly, are victims of circumstances - in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Conversely, those who appear to have phenomenal success in life, are beneficiaries of circumstances - in the right place at the right time.  In a previous blog post, I commented on the widening gap between the 'haves' and 'have nots' and I was referring to the inequities within human society.  I believe that inequity is regrettably an emergent property of human society, i.e. it happens whether we like it or not.  But what about the animal and plant worlds?  Do they suffer from the same injustices?

I certainly don't know enough about animal and plant life to ascertain whether, through their natural competition for survival, they create elite and lower-life sub groups.  But I do know that many species are not helped in their quest for life by the antics of humans.  Returning to the stray dog, there are many street dogs in Turkey,  For most, their existence is wretched, scavenging from day-to-day to keep themselves and their offspring fed.  Some are rescued and join a human family.  My wife and I have two ex street dogs and a formerly stray cat.  We are now one happy family and I am sure that collectively we are all happier than we would be individually - the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.  But we can't keep giving a home to every stray dog or cat in the street because we would soon run out of space, food and money.  There are organisations in Turkey that do help animals in distress and indeed, we have taken a couple of dogs to a local shelter recently that we found (dumped?) on our doorstep.  However, in my opinion, society is addressing the symptom of the problem and not its cause.  The millions of species on this planet all have an equal right to exist and coexist.  That includes you, the reader of this post, and the stray, starving dog that I referred to earlier.  It is my opinion that the human species, despite inequities within its own communities, regards itself as in some way superior to all other living species.

Humans' superiority complex is passed on through generations memetically (by imitation) rather than genetically (by reproduction).  I don't believe a newly-born baby is naturally cruel, but conversely I have seen young children, in different parts of the world, display complete contempt for animals.  As an example, I recently witnessed children kicking and throwing stones at a dog.  A few days later I observed a mature man kicking a street dog.  What's that if it's not learned behaviour?!  The big question is, can the situation be improved through education?  I'd like to think it could but I'm not so sure.  Some of the cruelest individuals in the history of mankind have been extremely well-educated.  Attitudes towards others don't necessarily improve with education, indeed the opposite can often be observed when, for example, academics display a holier than thou attitude towards 'lesser mortals'.

So to the little stray dog I say:

I apologise for the situation you find yourself in.  The reason you have got so little is because I and many others, have got too much.  I sincerely hope that all species will learn to respect the lives of others and in particular, mankind will come to its senses and shed its arrogant and unwarranted superior attitude towards others.

Amen!

It's fracking stupid!

Last week fracking was in the news again.  Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the fracturing of various rock layers by a pressurised liquid.  It is a technique in which a large amount of water is mixed with sand and chemicals and injected at high pressure into faults to release gas.  Royal Dutch Shell's chief executive Peter Voser told the BBC in an interview last week that fracking was important to Europe in order to stay competitive with the US.  His logic being that cheap energy released by fracking had 'revolutionised' the US energy market.  Well that's fine Mr Voser, but aren't there a few environmental issues with fracking?  The horizontal drilling technique used to extract gas involves pumping chemicals into the ground.  Those chemicals could push salt water to the surface and could poison drinking water.  There is also a risk of creating earthquakes.  In addition we mustn't forget that the gas itself is a non-renewable fossil fuel, which when burnt creates carbon dioxide, a generally accepted cause of global warming.

So let's return to Mr Voser's logic.  We in Europe should do it because the US is doing it, despite the environmental risks and the fact that it is not helping to reduce carbon emissions.  Indeed, isn't it possible that this 'abundant' source of fossil fuel could take the eye off the ball of renewable energy development?  So if the US decided that eating human babies was a source of cheap food and could help control the population, would Europe go along with that abhorrent idea to be competetive?  Of course not, it's a stupid question.  But the fracking logic, if you accept the risk of loss of lives, is just as fracking crazy!

What's clear to me is the fact that major energy companies, like Shell, are really only oil and gas companies and are paying lip service to the planet's atmospheric contamination problems, particularly when they can see a short term profit opportunity.  Yes, I do mean 'short term' because even 100 years, say, is a minute timespan compared with the age of the planet and the millions of future generations that we should be planning to support.

Now the proponents of fracking accept there are risks but propose better regulation as a solution.  But how can we regulate the unknown?  We don't understand the subterranean system well enough to predict unintended consequences.  It is one of many examples of commercial profit being put before common sense and frankly an endorsement for this risky practice by the head of an oil company, means nothing.

It's fracking stupid!