Will the rich avoid the climate apocalypse?” writes Tom Whyman in New Internationalist magazine. “Millionaire people prepare for the catastrophe. The only problem is that we are not all convinced.”

The main media serve us every day with an image or eye-catching headline on the destruction of the environment. Mention is made of the measures that should be taken to alleviate the disaster, and there is a growing number of social mobilizations for the authorities to really face up to... but the change is already taking place.

One of the first reactions to the damage so far caused by the climate madness in the south of the world is that the Governments of the rich North have militarized their borders to protect them from migrants who so far can reach through droplets but soon by floods. This is the policy of the armed lifeboat that investigative journalist Christian Parenti calls: if you're no longer on the boat, then you're about to shoot.

In line with this reaction, says Whyman, the governments of rich countries can choose to have their citizens at ease and be willing to sacrifice the rest of the mundane. “But over time, the waves are going to catch us as well, those of us who go inside the armed rescue boat. The selfish interests of the rich are far from the interests of others. Some of the firefighters who fought the terrible fires that ravaged California last year were private, hired by insurance companies to defend the homes of those who pay for their services.”

While everyone was burning in the California disaster, private firefighters defended the farms of the rich by knocking them down with products that slowed the flames and pierced the trenches. Hurricanes and floods have happened in the same way in Florida: the wealthiest neighborhoods have fled to higher neighborhoods, expelling the poorest of them. Gentrification is also related to climate.

But the real rich, the rich who have money, are also looking for more extreme solutions. Douglas Rushkoff speaks of her personal testimony: “The rich are conspiring to leave us behind.”

Douglas Mark Rushkoff EE.UU, 1961) is a theologian, writer, documentalist and professor specialized in technology, known for his writings on cyberpunk culture, open source solutions, etc. In the article we summarize here, he tells the explanatory anecdote that occurred to him last year.

Professor and famous speaker, he was invited to give a conference to a luxury resort. He believed that a group of investment bank leaders had been convened to give a talk about the future of technology and to that end he went to give the most expensive lecture in his life, charging half of what he earns in a year at university.

He found a very restricted audience: five well-born types, all men, of the highest in the world of great fortunes. Starting to talk, he realized that they weren't interested in what he was prepared for about the future of technology. They came with other questions.

Climate change, class struggle

“They started with pretty tender things, bitcoin accounts, to see if the quantum computer is already ... However, little by little they resorted to the topics they really were interested in. Which region, New Zealand or Alaska, will be most affected by the climate crisis? Is it true that Google is preparing a site for Ray Kurzweil's brain, and if so, your consciousness will survive during the transition or die and resurrect completely renovated? Finally, the owner of a stock exchange company said that in his palace the underground bunker was almost finished and asked: How will I keep the command over my security officers after the event?”

With this euphemism, the five elite sharks called the event, the event, to what the collapse of the environment can cause, whether it's the spread of disease or the collapse of states, the nuclear explosion or whatever.

The bunker's question had some background. The rich realize that armed guards would be needed to protect their property from the enraged masses. But how do you pay those guards if the money loses its value? How can we prevent the guards from choosing a new leader in chaos between them? Their calculations included the enclosure of all foods with the same keys that guaranteed the fidelity of sentinels. Or that special disciplinary collar guards be imposed in exchange for them to remain alive. Or the placement of robots as guards.

“This surprised me,” says Rushkoff- because the theme of the meeting was the future of technology. But deep down, they're worried about going into the steppe of the other big ones, Elon Musk (Tesla), who wants to colonize Mars, Peter Thiel (Paypal) who wants to prevent aging, or Sam Altman (Y Combinator) or Ray Kurzweil (Google) who wants to load their brains into supercomputers. The digital future they would like has little to do with improving the living conditions of all mankind and many with their flight from the dangers of climate change: rising sea levels, mass migrations, planned pandemics, hatred of minorities and depletion of natural resources. The future of technology for them is based on fleeing.”

Rushkoff had insinuated to the rich that better than fear the crowd and even the guards today treat them, consider the security team as a family and deploy this inclusive attitude to all the links of their business, promoting sustainability and distributing wealth, would be less risky for an immense event. After all, it is better to develop technological advances for the common good than for romantic dreams. The billionaires appreciated the optimism, but they didn't take it for themselves; they weren't interested in how to avoid the catastrophe: they think we've gone too far.

Ruhskoff says at the end: “Human being is a team sport, cannot survive or escape on an individual basis. If human beings have a future, they will have it together.” Tom spoke more deeply in New Internationalist: “These actions that the rich anticipate remind us that climate change is a class struggle.”