It is amazing the way some people are trying to pull the fast one on the world, yes the groovy world of national interest. It works very well in poorer and overpopulated societies, giving some manipulative people to play savior and fatten. In Indian society it has become part of tradition in elite
section. This extension of thinking is what comes out as balderdash of per capita. I must say our Environment minister Jairam Ramesh has played his role very well and yes our economist PM has got his calculations right. The bluff need be called at the earliest.
India’s ‘tough posturing’ is more to do with business lobby and other interest groups and less to do with reality of the nation.
Mr. Ramesh was quoted as saying that India’s need of development is paramount before emission reductions. Well spoken sir and yes I don’t think you deserve to be the Environment minister of billion nation, it is amply clear your brief seems to be different from the ministry (he could be a commerce minister). Anyway whose development he is talking about?. Environment degradation affects the poor section first, clearly therefore his development seems to be for richer section. Secondly what policy changes has been made by the government to reduce carbon footprint of richer section?. If the recent budget was any indications then it is about to get worse. What place has SUV in Indian road?. If that is development then how does it benefit majority of people in this country? Jairam Ramesh also doesn’t even have time to attend important meets wherein global leaders are discussing issues before Copenhagen. Amazing.
Whether it is per capita emission or per capita consumption India is considered among the lowest in the world. The per capita carbon emission of India is ridiculously low compared to countries like US or Australia (the so called developed countries). So what does that mean?. Well the balderdashers would bring in the national interest “look we don’t do harm. So why should we pay?”. The readers might have noted the emphasis on the word ‘we’. This precisely is the nonsense elite section all around the world play on common people. It is easy to live on poor, when they are in millions it becomes easier. The Indian story is no different.
The question is not a
bout India’s low per capita emission rate, the question is why and how?. Millions of people live below poverty line (atleast quarter of population by any conservative estimate), that simply means almost 30million people don’t even have carbon print!!. Majority of the people around the country are very conscious about consuming less or try effective utilizations of resources. They therefore keep the carbon footprint at the minimal. Sometime back I asked this kid what she did when she was stressed. Her reply was instantaneous “go for a long drive!”. I am sure many morons who are reading this blog share the same understanding on tackling stress.
Most people in this part of the world though don’t have such luxury and generally think in terms of saving money, so save fuel, therefore take shortcuts or share. The reason why fuel price increase is a sensitive issue, it has a cascading effect. Clearly most Indians don’t handle stress by going for long drive (that sounds almost insane). It is in the same class of indulgence sports like car racing also fall (dimwits refer it to as formulae one, no formulae there dude. Driving fast and wasting fuel is not smart). In India these kind of events have special attention, the more it is elitist, more away from common people, more chance for that being a popular sport!!. It is more about traditional insight “to see the opportunity”!!. That needs no specific competence since most people are not even aware of these.
It is this very “opportunity” that is being packed as national interest. The logic of per capita fits in well. It serves their lifestyle at the expense of common people very well indeed. This blogger very strongly submits that national demarcations as a standard in deciding on issues threatening the world like global warming is short site
d and grossly ineffective. This blogger though understands the practical limitations of declassifying nation-state. Though countries may have varying per capita emissions but to classify a country as single entity is grievously mistaken, there are entrenched interest groups in societies. In poorer societies they are looking for easy profit, exploiting nature at the expense of livelihood of poor marginalized people is easily done with corrupt system and complaint market driven elite. Clearly lifestyle choices of richer section of society is having a serious impact on livelihood options of poor, it’s very exploitative nature is unsustainable the reason why we are in such state of affair. Paradox here is capitalism is hinged on consumption, it is amazing they still haven’t found any better alternatives. Clearly the model of development is seriously questioned.
The leaders at 
Copenhagen will have to recognize these. Any agreement if taking into consideration per capita, like for instance India, will have to strongly bring into focus that India’s low per capita is based more on disparities and not on any lack of per capita emission from elite sections. Hence agreement should include step by step measures taken to bring emission (reducing carbon footprint) down by elite section in poorer societies. This will have to be an integral part of the agreement. Leaders of a country where carbonated drink (made from exploiting nature and poor people, well documented by the blogger) is easily accessible than potable water or basic medicine when start showing too much concern for national interest then we know we are having some big money working.
section. This extension of thinking is what comes out as balderdash of per capita. I must say our Environment minister Jairam Ramesh has played his role very well and yes our economist PM has got his calculations right. The bluff need be called at the earliest. 
bout 
d and grossly ineffective. This blogger though understands the practical limitations of declassifying nation-state. Though countries may have varying per capita emissions but to classify a country as single entity is grievously mistaken, there are entrenched interest groups in societies. In poorer societies they are looking for easy profit, exploiting nature at the expense of livelihood of poor marginalized people is easily done with corrupt system and complaint market driven elite. Clearly lifestyle choices of richer section of society is having a serious impact on livelihood options of poor, it’s very exploitative nature is unsustainable the reason why we are in such state of affair. Paradox here is capitalism is hinged on consumption, it is amazing they still haven’t found any better alternatives. Clearly the model of development is seriously questioned.
