Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

 "At this point, only Putin can save us by threatening the West with nuclear strikes if they don’t go net zero soon! They jumped for every other threat..."

- ADAPTATION-GUIDE







Ten years ago, President Obama embarked on a monumental task: convincing Americans that climate change wasn't just another distant problem but a looming catastrophe that required immediate action. 

He might as well have been trying to convince a cat to take a bath.

In 2014, a Pew Research Center survey revealed that only 40% of Americans saw climate change as a major threat. Compare that to more than 70% of Japanese citizens who got it. Even Europeans were far more concerned, with majorities in countries like Italy, Spain, France, and Germany acknowledging the risks. 

Meanwhile, Americans were more worried about Islamic extremism, financial instability, and—of course—nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea. But the environment? Meh, it barely registered.

Fast forward to 2024, and not much has changed. Despite overwhelming evidence that our planet is heating up faster than a teenager’s TikTok feed, Americans remain stubbornly indifferent. 

Climate change is still not at the top of the list of concerns. Why? Is it ignorance? Is it denial? Or is it something more deeply rooted in our biology?

Enter the book "Minding the Climate: How Neuroscience Can Help Solve Our Environmental Crisis," which sheds light on this very issue. It turns out that our brains are hardwired for short-term survival, not long-term planning. 

Our ancestors didn’t need to worry about rising sea levels; they were too busy not getting eaten by saber-toothed tigers. So, our decision-making evolved around immediate, tangible rewards. Hunt, gather, eat, repeat.

Now, let's talk climate change—something so complex and distant that it’s like asking our brains to solve a Rubik’s cube while juggling flaming swords. 

We can’t see CO2 levels rising in the atmosphere. We can't feel the planet warming (until it's too late). And when we drive our gas-guzzling SUVs or fly off on a jet for a vacation, the rewards are immediate and visible—comfort, convenience, and maybe a few Instagram-worthy photos. 

But the consequences? Invisible, far-off, and seemingly unrelated to our daily lives.

The real kicker is that the very things causing climate change—fossil fuels—are also deeply embedded in our economic and social systems. They’ve made life easier, and they’ve made some people incredibly wealthy. Trying to convince those in power to dismantle the very system that’s filled their coffers? Good luck with that.

Education isn’t helping either. While climate science is more accessible than ever, putting a price tag on education has created a society more focused on short-term financial gains than long-term sustainability. And don’t even get me started on book banning—because, apparently, knowledge is dangerous now.

The media, CEOs, shareholders, and conservative politicians haven’t exactly been cheerleaders for climate action. Instead of training our brains for the necessary change, they’ve been busy sowing doubt, protecting profits, and deflecting responsibility.

So here we are, 2024, with a planet in crisis and a public still mostly indifferent. As Vice President Harris and Governor Walz step into leadership roles, they face a Herculean task. They must somehow rewire our collective brain to prioritize the future of our planet over the comforts of today.

But let’s be honest—until we figure out how to make the fight against climate change as rewarding as scrolling through social media or buying the latest gadget, we’re in for a rough ride.

Good luck, Harris and Walz. You’re going to need it.

Happy Labor Day

Famous Last Words, August 2024

 Man makes a great fuss about this planet which is only a ball-bearing in the hub of the universe.

- Christopher Morley

BERNIE: THE PODCAST EPISODE 9 - BILL MCKIBBEN

The Earth Has Already Used Up Its Resources for 2024: What Does This Mean?

According to the Global Footprint Network, Earth reached its ecological limits for 2024 on August 1st. This date marks what is known as Earth Overshoot Day, the day when humanity has consumed all the natural resources that the planet can renew in a year. 

From now on, we are essentially living on credit. The planet’s ecosystems can no longer keep up with the consumption that occurred in the first seven months of the year. This means that humanity is living as if it had 1.7 Earths at its disposal. Disturbingly, this day is a day earlier than last year’s.

The Global Footprint Network calculates Earth Overshoot Day every year. According to their analysis, it takes a full year for nature to regenerate the resources that humanity consumes from January 1st to August 1st. The calculation compares two key figures: the available productive land and the land needed to sustain current consumption levels, which includes the area required to absorb carbon dioxide emissions through new forests. 

This complex calculation method has faced criticism, with some questioning its accuracy and transparency.

For instance, the Cologne Institute for Economic Research noted in 2021 that combining renewable resources and emissions in the calculation is problematic, as they are not easily comparable. 

The issue of global warming is not primarily about land overuse; it’s mainly about the overproduction of carbon dioxide. This makes the required land area in the calculation appear larger than it might actually be, which should be clarified, according to the institute.

Even environmental organizations like the WWF have criticized the focus on land use. The Earth Overshoot Day for Germany alone fell on May 2nd this year—two days earlier than last year. 

If everyone on the planet lived and consumed like the average German, the world would have exhausted its annual budget for sustainable resources and environmentally friendly emissions by that date. In this case, humanity would need three Earths to sustain itself. 

But it's not just Germany that's struggling; many other countries are too. For example, Qatar and Luxembourg reached their Earth Overshoot Day in February, while Canada, the United States, and Belgium hit theirs in March.

If everyone lived like the average person in China, we would need 2.4 Earths. For the United States, it would be a staggering 5.1 Earths. On the other hand, countries like Jamaica (November 12th), Iraq (November 15th), and Ecuador (November 24th) manage to stretch their resources further.

Historically, humanity's resource consumption was more sustainable. In 1961, we were only using 0.73 Earths, meaning there were still reserves. 

However, since the first official Earth Overshoot Day on December 29th, 1970, the date has steadily moved earlier each year. In the last decade, it has settled around similar dates, except for one anomaly: the COVID-19 pandemic year of 2020. 

Compared to 2019, when Earth Overshoot Day fell on July 29th, it moved to August 22nd in 2020. This shift was due to reduced wood consumption and lower carbon emissions during the lockdowns. However, this effect was short-lived, and by 2021, Earth Overshoot Day returned to July 29th.

According to the WWF, Earth Overshoot Day could be pushed back by seven days if half of the global meat consumption were replaced with plant-based alternatives. 

A staggering 13 days could be gained if we reduced food waste by 50%. These simple changes could buy the Earth some much-needed time, yet the clock continues to tick earlier each year.

The question remains: Will we heed the warning signs or continue down this unsustainable path?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

 It is the test of a good religion whether you can joke about it.

- Gilbert K. Chesterton

Title: The West's Immigration Challenge: A Crisis of Assimilation

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

Western political leaders have failed to recognize that advanced economies in open societies lack the socio-economic and socio-cultural mechanisms to absorb a large number of poorly educated men from developing countries or war-torn regions. 

These migrants often come from backgrounds that do not share the same institutions, culture, or moral values as the West. 

It's irresponsible to assume that all who immigrate to the West will fully adapt to our way of life simply because they arrive here voluntarily.

This assumption might have held true during the 19th and early 20th centuries when large numbers of Europeans fled wars and economic stagnation to settle overseas. 

Within one or two generations, they were fully assimilated. Similar patterns can be observed, albeit more slowly, among immigrants from Asia, Latin America, and parts of Africa. 

However, it has become increasingly clear that Muslim immigrants, in particular, face significant challenges in adapting to Western societies.

Even when they achieve economic success, as often seen in America, they still confront insurmountable cultural differences between Islam and the West. 

While many Muslims succeed in reconciling their faith with their new environment, this is a complex and demanding process. 

Unfortunately, a growing number of Muslims in America, Britain, France, and Germany are turning to Islamism instead.

This is what the guide says: 

If you break the law, there are consequences. Rwanda was never the answer. But what about Ukraine? They need people to clear mines, weave camouflage nets, and remove tons of debris. Prisons could house delinquents who assemble drones.

Your Weekly Navigator

 In skating over thin ice our safety is in our speed.

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

How Safe is Germany?

This is a question that resonates not only abroad but increasingly among Germans themselves, as reports of knife violence, often resulting in serious injuries and fatalities, become disturbingly routine. 

A growing sense of insecurity grips the nation, evidenced by a survey from the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA), which reveals that more than half of the population feels uneasy using public transportation at night. Two-thirds of women actively avoid certain areas. Yet, the political sphere remains silent on the existence of so-called "No-Go Areas."

The statistics are grim. Violent crimes, especially group assaults and knife attacks, are on the rise. 

Migrants are overrepresented in these incidents—a fact that is often glossed over in public discourse. 

According to the BKA, cases of "dangerous and serious bodily injury" involving a knife have surged by 9.7% in the past year, totaling 8,951 cases in 2022, up from 8,160 in 2021 and 7,071 in 2020. Overall, violent crime, which includes murder, manslaughter, robbery, aggravated assault, and rape, has reached its highest level in 15 years, with 214,099 cases recorded in the past year—an 8.6% increase compared to the previous year. The primary driver is the rise in "dangerous and serious bodily injury" cases, which increased by 6.8% to 154,541 cases—the highest number ever recorded.

This alarming trend is the outcome of a failed internal security policy, compounded by a uniquely European ideological confusion. Former Chancellor Angela Merkel turned a blind eye to the consequences of the refugee crisis, the climate crisis, and the euro crisis—but let's not digress. 

The anticipated correction of past mistakes never materialized with the change in power. Germany’s domestic intelligence agency views any ethnically or culturally defined concept of "people" as inherently racist, despite the fact that the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) once campaigned with the slogan "Children instead of Indians" (Kinder statt Inder) and ran a campaign against dual citizenship that excluded non-Germans. 

What were once positions of the CDU, constitutionally valid at the time, have now become the platform of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and are deemed unconstitutional.

The ideological battle between the left and right misses the point: the German people are weary of these debates. They don't want to be labeled as anti-Muslim or racist for perceiving a risk in the influx of migrants from different cultural backgrounds. 

At the same time, they have no appetite for the blood-and-soil rhetoric of far-right figures like Björn Höcke. People are fed up with political games that fail to improve their daily lives. 

They want to live in safety, to walk through a market square, attend a festival, or traverse a dark park without fear. Yet, in Germany, the simplest demands have always proven to be the most difficult to fulfill.

The Navigator said:

"Thousands of unemployed Germans could be retrained as security personnel, but where is the political will to implement such practical solutions"? 

Instead, the focus remains on ideological purity, while ordinary citizens are left to navigate a world where safety feels increasingly elusive. 

Germany, once a beacon of stability, now finds itself grappling with a reality that is anything but secure.