The accidents of his existence led the columnist to an African country reputed to be one of the poorest in the world. As during any reporting assignment, the columnist records many observations, emotions, facts, sensations. But a new idea comes to him. Not yet complete, he offers it to the public more as a proposition for reflection than an absolute theory. Perhaps it is provocative.

    Common wisdom suggests that if we don't succeed in curbing climate change, the first and principal victims will be the poor countries of the Southern hemisphere. All the same, that does not mean that the countries of the North would be unscathed. The consequences would be harmful everywhere, although to different degrees.

    One may therefore wonder about the ability of different societies to resist or to adapt to those new conditions. The paradoxical proposition is that the richest societies are not necessarily those the best-placed to confront those changes: accustomed to a profusion of goods, infused with an advertising ideology that presents excess consumption as an ideal, organized along the principle of brutal environmental transformation, they seem sadly ill-equipped, both psychologically and culturally, to slip into the harsh new conditions of existence. Their material and technical resources could mitigate part of those negative transformations, but the mental "equipment" handicaps them profoundly in the face of their inevitable reduction in standard of living.

    On the other hand, societies accustomed to enduring restrictions, societies that know how to organize themselves with little, societies habituated to mobility ("exodus"), would display greater "resilience" to the torments-to-come than would rich societies.

    The hypothesis is that in the face of problems, what is most essential is neither technical nor material armament, but cultural equipment and the disposition to live frugally.

    Let's go at the question from a more optimistic angle. It is possible to prevent the environmental crisis. That presupposes a drastic reduction in material and energy consumption by the most wasteful countries. Those in the North. To achieve that, they must decondition themselves, deprogram themselves of the consumer ideology according to which more is better. Africa may teach the West how to get used to frugality. The debate here is not whether simplicity be suffered or chosen; what's important is that it form the basis of our daily lives and our culture. So, to prevent the environmental crisis, Europe could ask Africa to help it change its lifestyle. In fact, Europe needs help developing the cultural values of moderation.

    Africa, help our mental development.

    Africa, help Europe enter the new history.

    --------

    Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.