by Mags, 26 October 2009 (republished on 19 January 2010)

Please click here for bloggers' bio

We're republishing this blog because the issue of climate change is still a battle with which we have yet to win and this blog perhaps more than any other iCUBED.us has published expresses our collective frustration...

Officially part of the secondary school literature curriculum, ANIMAL FARM is an allegorical fable in which the heroes and villains are the animals.

The story begins when the animals are convinced to revolt against their human "owners" for the promise of a brighter future where they - the animals - will enjoy the full benefits of their own collective labor.

And, because the story is written by an idealist, with socialist beliefs and liberal leanings, the smartest animals on the farm are the pigs, which I imagine is meant to break unfair stereotypes that "pigs are stupid and slothful". In particular two pigs (Napolean and Snowball) are especially bright, and these two convince the other animals that by pushing out their human 'masters', their animal lives will be more fulfilled because all the animals will be equal, without human masters to lord over them or to benefit from their animal labor.

At first the other animals are reluctant, worrying rather sensibly that without the humans to run the farm, they would not know how to work the system which assures them of food and shelter enough for them to subsist. But the pigs are convincing, and finally manage to eject the farmer and his wife, and they take over the maintenance of the farm. Before long all the animals of the farm end up with less food, less comfort, and less freedoms serving their porcine-overlords than they ever did under their human masters.

Historically, this book is understood to be George Orwell's response to his concern about the rise of totalitarian regimes, of which he was a personal witness around the time of the Second World War. But much more than that, this book endures because it describes how there will always be different interpretations of the concept of "survival of the fittest" and thus we owe it to ourselves to be vigilant about how we choose to define what "fittest" means.

In our world of rapid change and rampant consumerism, rising population, depleted basic resources, survival of the human race itself is NOT assured, and yet we seem stuck on old grievances about the injustice of developing nations like India and China not being permitted to pollute at the rate that developed nations once were allowed to WHEN THERE WAS NO IMMINENT THREAT OF MASS EXTINCTION AND ECOSYSTEM COLLAPSE. Gone from this equation is the appreciation that without the progress of those developed nations, whose populations are NOT increasing like they are in the developing world, we are wasting precious time quibbling over things that will be of zero significance when the earth's ecosystems are damaged beyond repair.

What does 'survival of the fittest' mean in our world today, where we seem to need to find IMMEDIATE AND HONEST solutions to the crises in climate change, biodiversity and over-population? Is it possible to imagine that one race might magically be spared? Are there too many disparate voices, too many agendas on the table for the important work of repairing the damage to our planetary farm? Is it worth considering to elect one nation most capable of leading at this time of earth's crisis to begin the important work of leading humanity through this critical point?

Our very survival may depend on it!

COMMENT BELOW: What's your opinion, do you believe that we are in danger of mass extinction at the rate and direction we seem to be moving?

Please watch the video below of a five minute speech by a twelve year old, made in 1992. It seems very little has been done since then, and one wonders whether that room full of adults feel any sense of responsibility or job-satisfaction ...