Big things that go “BANG!” and destroy the world…

This is a bold topic for me to delve into, but is something that, like every other person, I think about these days quite regularly.

It just so happened that I read a couple of articles/pages today out of just skimming through normal news headlines. I’m not sure how it happened that my reading was drawn towards these issues, but I would assume it has something to do with the amount of news coverage that has built and is still building around nuclear warfare.

We live in a time of fear where large governments, with large amounts of power, have big red buttons at their disposal to be pushed if “the going gets tough”. No longer is it a world where, being as youthful as I am, I would say I don’t want to have children because they’re smelly, scream a lot and will devoid my life of all elements of fun, but upon moving into my 26th year and realising I might consider them as an option in my 30’s, I am now starting to see it is now a world where I wouldn’t want to chance having children AT ALL, given the current state of affairs. Plus I may not even live to 30 if the world is obliterated!

I like living in Australia. I’m a proud Australian. I especially like the freedoms we have, and I suppose my naive view was that our government would support the things that matter as we’re a strong true blue nation that is always calling a spade a spade. But as I move into my 26th year it seems my eyes continue to open to the events around me, and I am consistently finding that’s not the case with our current circus-style government. I can’t really tell the difference between either of the major parties anymore and then the independents seem to come across as a joke, well in local politics anyway.

Anyway, without digressing too far in listing all the the things that matter which I think our government should be focussing on right now, I’ll instead talk to just one that is in the forefront of my mind right now, and that’s supporting an International Nuclear Weapons Convention.

I would suggest further reading on:

http://www.icanw.org.au/convention

But the main points discussed on producing this treaty are (and this is pulled from that site, not my words):

1. The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons calls on all nations to negotiate a Nuclear Weapons Convention (NWC) to ban nuclear weapons and ensure their elimination.
2. The NWC would prohibit the development, testing, production, stockpiling, transfer, use and threat of use of nuclear weapons, as well as the production of fissile material suitable for making them (either highly enriched uranium or separated plutonium).
3. The NWC would establish an agency to ensure that countries comply with the terms of the treaty.
4. In 2007 ICAN launched Securing Our Survival (SOS): The Case for a Nuclear Weapons Convention. It reflects on the changed global security environment and answers critical questions relating to the process of nuclear disarmament. ICAN calls on all countries immediately to commence negotiations for an NWC. We believe it is an idea whose time has come.

There are 146 governments in the world out of 194 in support of this. Unfortunately our government in Australia is sitting “on the fence”. The site goes into further detail explaining why this is so and what efforts Australia is doing in the short term vs longer term. We are apparently in support of this in the longer term but will not advocate negotiating a treaty right now. I can’t think of any time more crucial than the present!! This was also a political promise out of electing the labour government into power!

Then I read on ThePunch about a conspiracy that our government has been using our taxes to invest in companies that manufacture nuclear weapons. Of course I am reading this with an open mind, as some of the companies listed (i.e.  Babcock International, Boeing, Honeywell International, Rockweel Collins  and Rolls Royce) also manufacture other materials/products – i.e. planes and cars etc. I would like to think on principle, the investment in these companies was around their mainstream products. However, also in principle, if these companies are also involved in other such ventures should this not be formed as part of the decision making process when channeling tax payers money from the Future Fund into said companies? From, say, an ethical standpoint?

It disgusts me at the thought that my hard-earned bucks (the $1500 odd I spend a month on tax!) is channeled into companies involved in such ventures that keep me slightly on edge during my everyday living!

I wish that our government would see this as a more serious issue. Interesting enough on the ICAN website, it also shows what governments are NOT in support of establishing a treaty. That would of course be all the major countries such as Europe, the US, Russia, Iran, and Iraq. What’s the bet that Australia is ‘on the fence’ because of this? It always appears that we take the most diplomatic neutral approach to kiss the toes and stay mates with the bigger powers of the world. Smart to an extent perhaps, but when are we going to stand on our own two feet and declare what we feel and think without worrying about the other big cheeses??

I totally agree that there is no real purpose of having nuclear bombs other than wreaking havoc and destroying humanity. I believe an international nuclear weapons convention that does all of the above is a step closer to having less fear in the world with less big governments such as those above who have big red buttons in front of them that they can press at any time.

Also, is uranium not yet ANOTHER resource we’re sucking out of the Earth alongside oil?? When both resources are depleted, what then? Or will we already have destroyed ourselves before we’ve destroyed the planet?

If big powerful governments can’t use the materials they’re sucking out of the earth responsibly and for a real purpose other than creating war (i.e. is nuclear not energy we can use outside of electricity as well as space rockets/exploration and other means?), then that responsibility should be taken away from them.

An analogy for me that fits this scenario is, if you give a toddler a sharp object, chances are they’re going to hurt themselves and not use it for any real intended purpose other than inflicting pain. You wouldn’t really give it to them in the first place. Clearly we’re not evolved enough as a species to use the big risky things effectively and responsibly.

Humanity is just a toddler really in the scheme of things and needs to perhaps take a step back until it overcomes the urge to kill one another.