Yves here. At its core, our denial of the dire-and-coming-ahead-of-schedule effects of climate change is very similar to our denial of death. With the exception of those who are religious and those who have had near-death experiences, most of us don’t want to think seriously about death or climate change. So as readers may guess, I’m not big on hope. Hope against reality often produces action/inadequacy, like the Green New Deal’s rainbows and unicorns.
Written by Thomas Neuburger. It was first published in the book God’s Spies
Much is taken, much remains; again
We don’t have that power now that in the old days
Earth and heaven shook, what we are, we are
— Alfred Lord TennysonAll your crying is useless
Go up to the house
Come down from the cross, we can use wood
Go up to the house
— Tom WaitsDoes death make life miserable?
– Submissive
I’ve been wanting to write for some time about how we might respond to the coming climate disaster, Jackpot, in William Gibson’s terms. Respond to what will be, in terms of world history, the world’s most important event since the birth of the brain and culture we call it.
I started that project in a few stages here and there. But I wanted to give these thoughts a proper page.
A Push to Give Hope
Let’s start with this, from scientist Kate Marvel:
As a climate scientist, I am often asked to speak about hope. Especially in the current political climate, audiences want to be told that everything will be okay in the end. And, unfortunately, I have a deep need to be liked and an innate tendency to be optimistic that leads to accepting more speaking invitations than are good for me. Climate change is bleak, planners say. Tell us an interesting story. Give us hope. The problem is, I don’t have one.
“Give hope” is the admonition that is always present in the climate. Consider this from Kaitlin Naughton, a scientist with the British Antarctic Survey, writing in The Conversation: “Conventional wisdom is that you have to give people hope: to say that there is a disaster behind one door, but we can avoid it if we just choose a different one.”
This is more than conventional wisdom. The strategic argument is: If you pressure people with insulting words, they will shut up and do nothing. We need people to take action. (Clear: Because we can still win, we maintain a life with great strength.)
And this becomes almost a moral discipline, a subject of moral assessment, and sometimes, of shame. “Don’t talk about the lost millions (dollars, lives). Talk about benefits – new jobs, green economy. Don’t be Debbie.”
It’s all well and good. But what if it seems to you, as it seems to many, that death has been cast? Are you lying? Do cheerleader work? Or admit the truth (as you and your audience see it), and offer, not hope, but something more true to the facts?
The facts are on the ground
The truth is, we are doing nothing about the weather. You noticed that, right?
And notice, I hope, the reason: that we – I mean both parties – are ruled (we must say) by money-crazed psychopaths who have put a lock on the entire electoral process, from the debate to reaching the polls, to make sure that only the person who will eat the money can win. (Yes, Trump was a funded candidate in 2016.)
Source link