Climate change coming — corporate coppers are getting ready

❝ …Their statistical and tactical approaches (are) fundamentally connected. All businesses exposed themselves to risk, which had to be mitigated, insured or, more relevantly, defended against. Even if the Pinkertons couldn’t predict the specific risks of the future, they had a general sense of what it might look like — and what opportunities they might avail themselves of as it materialized.

According to the World Bank, by 2050 some 140 million people may be displaced by sea-level rise and extreme weather, driving escalations in crime, political unrest and resource conflict. Even if the most conservative predictions about our climate future prove overstated, a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in temperature during the next century will almost certainly provoke chaos, in what experts call climate change’s “threat multiplier”: Displacement begets desperation begets disorder. Reading these projections from the relative comforts of the C-suite, it wasn’t difficult to see why a company might consider enhancing its security protocols.

❝ For Pinkerton, the bet is twofold: first, that there’s no real material difference between climate change and any other conflict — as the world grows more predictably dangerous, tactical know-how will simply be more in demand than ever. And second, that by adding data analytics, Pinkerton stands to compete more directly with traditional consulting firms like Deloitte, which offer pre- and postdisaster services (supply-chain monitoring, damage documentation, etc.), but which cannot, say, dispatch a helicopter full of armed guards to Guatemala in an afternoon. In theory, Pinkerton can do both — a fully militarized managerial class at corporate disposal.

Better read this, folks! Our Fake President and the Republican Party of Pimps for corporate America have their side of this question already picked out. To them, mitigating the effects of climate change – much less reversal – aren’t especially critical to the class of profiteers who will own the cool breezes of mountaintop sanctuaries and any other calm, cool, company command posts (golf course included) they require. Folks who need jobs that pay well for ignoring who you kill and maim will not be in short supply.

Weezer offered $10 million to split up

A group of frustrated music fans want Weezer to break up, and they’re willing to pay them. Claiming the band has never improved on their 1996 album Pinkerton, the organisers of a new campaign hope to raise $10m to convince Weezer to pack it in and stop “disappointing” fans. “This is an abusive relationship,” the project’s creator said. “It needs to [end].”

“I’m tired of it,” James Burns explained to Seattle’s the Stranger. “Every year, Rivers Cuomo swears that he’s changed, and that [Weezer’s] new album is the best thing that he’s done since Pinkerton, and what happens? Another pile of crap like Beverly Hills or I’m Your Daddy.” Instead of leaving snarky comments on the internet, Burns is urging like-minded haters to put their money where their mouths are. “I beg you, Weezer,” he said. “Take our money and disappear.”

Burns has a long way to go. At the time of writing, he has raised a grand total of $273 toward his $10m. But if Guardian readers suddenly flock to the campaign, remortgaging their homes to banish Weezer for good, it could conceivably work out. The band’s drummer, Patrick Wilson, commented on Twitter: “If they can make it 20[million dollars],” he wrote, “we’ll do the ‘deluxe breakup.'”

According to Burns, Weezer’s musical entropy doesn’t just affect fans – it affects everyone. “I have never been a fan of this band,” he said. “I think that they are pretty much horrible … [But Weezer fans] are our brothers and sisters, our friends, our lovers … I am tired of my friends being disappointed year after year.”

Can we steal the idea and use it on politicians?