Showing posts with label denialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label denialism. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Mobilizing an emergency mindset

 

What can we learn from the way our leaders handled the Second World War and what they are doing with COVID-19 to inform our approach to the climate emergency?

Emergency action

 

Linda McQuaig reviews A Good War1 by Seth Klein who issued a compelling call to arms and presents an inspiring vision of a possible response in Canada to the climate crisis. While the world continues to fast-forward on a path to catastrophe for humankind—and there is really only about a decade left to change course—the CBC blithely insists on maintaining some silly notion of journalistic objectivity—as if it were dealing with a topic for which there are competing biases that must be weighed. This is a perfect example of what Seth Klein calls “the new climate denialism,” in his powerful and important new book: A Good War: Mobilizing Canada for the Climate Emergency.


Under the old climate denialism political leaders and business commentators simply denied the scientific facts of global warming. Under the new denialism, political leaders and business types claim they understand and accept the science. But they remain in denial when it comes to action, imposing measures that are far short of what’s needed if we are actually going to deal with the looming disaster. Another factor behind this timidity is the reluctance of today’s leaders to confront Big Oil and its bombastic political supporters, particularly in Alberta. This fossil fuel lobby makes the argument that, by itself, Canada has little power to reduce global emissions, and, since some other countries aren’t doing their share, why should we compromise our economic prosperity to do our part? In fact, as Klein shows, similar arguments applied during the war: fighting Nazism required a worldwide effort, and Canada was only one small participant, unable to achieve much on its own. Even the United States wasn’t involved until 1942. The threat no doubt felt quite removed from Canadian shores.2


Seth Klein, an adjunct professor with Simon Fraser University’s urban studies program and the former B.C. director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, writes that the federal and provincial governments still don’t treat climate change as an emergency.


 

They need to show leadership and draw lessons from history. Nicholas Stern, author of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, has said governments should be spending two per cent of their GDP on climate-mitigation efforts, which in Canadian terms would be about $50 billion per year.


That means the Trudeau government isn’t merely spending a little less than it should in the face of the climate emergency. It is spending less by a massive order of magnitude.

But in response to the climate emergency, we have seen nothing of this sort. In contrast to C.D. Howe’s wartime creations, the Trudeau government has established two new Crown corporations during its time in office – the Canada Infrastructure Bank (which has thus far accomplished very little), and the Trans Mountain Corporation (an ill-advised decision that makes all Canadians the owners of a 60-year-old oil pipeline). If our government really saw the climate emergency as an emergency, it would quickly conduct an inventory of our conversion needs to determine how many heat pumps, solar arrays, wind farms, electric buses, etc. we will need to electrify virtually everything and end our reliance on fossil fuels. Then, it would establish a new generation of Crown corporations to ensure those items are manufactured and deployed at the requisite scale. It should also create an audacious new federal transfer program – I recommend a $20-40 billion annual Climate Emergency Just Transition transfer program – to catapult climate infrastructure spending and worker retraining in every province.3


Klein asserts that If our current leaders believe we face a climate emergency, then they need to act and speak like it’s an emergency. That is what our leaders did in the Second World War and what they are doing with COVID-19. The climate emergency demands that same level of response.

 

References

 


1

Klein, Seth. (2020) A Good War: Mobilizing Canada for the Climate Emergency. Toronto, ON:ECW Press.

2

(n.d.). In a compelling call to arms, Seth Klein presents inspiring vision. Retrieved November 25, 2020, from https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/seth-klein-a-good-war-review 

3

(2020, November 25). Canada must adopt an emergency mindset to climate change. Retrieved November 25, 2020, from https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/november-2020/canada-must-adopt-an-emergency-mindset-to-climate-change/ 


Monday, May 27, 2019

Denial Grief and Denialism

A segment of the CBC “The Sunday Edition” program, broadcast on August 19, 2018, introduced Keith Kahn-Harris, a lecturer at Birkbeck College, University of London and at Leo Baeck College, and an associate fellow at the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, who offered ideas from his latest book, called Denial: The Unspeakable Truth.

Coastal erosion
Keith Kahn-Harris has a theory about why so many people reject scientific consensus and documented historical fact. He calls it denialism and argues that it is making the practice of politics and public policy more difficult and divisive. Statements that are backed by denialism include:

The Holocaust never happened.The planet isn’t warming.Vaccines cause autism. There is no such thing as AIDS.

The Earth is flat.1
Flat here


Keith Kahn-Harris was a quest on CBC Ideas produced by Naheed Mustafa.
https://i.cbc.ca/1.5140297.1558107042!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_780/671581886.jpg

The discussion defined Denial as when someone avoids acknowledging something they know to be true. A good example of this is when someone is addicted to shopping but avoids acknowledging that addiction by never looking at their credit card statements. They watch the debt mount but still claim their shopping isn't a problem.

Denialism, on the other hand, is an effort to build an alternative truth because the verifiable truth built on scientific consensus threatens something the person holds dear. The denialist lacks the language to express socially that they actually value something that is being blocked by the efforts of others. Holocaust deniers actually want to express something they hold of value from the Nazi reign.


"I think there are plenty of people within the climate change denialist world who are preserving a particular vision of the way humans can ideally act without any kind of restraint, that we can change the world without any kind of negative consequences," says Kahn-Harris.2


To help us with our psychological state in dealing with the climate emergency Dr. Steve Running recently took a fresh look at the widely recognized concepts on the "5 stages of grief" that Elizabeth Kubler-Ross defined back in the 1970s to summarize how people deal differentially with shocking news, such as being informed that they have terminal cancer.

Climate grief
It seems that these stages of grief provide a very good analogy to how people are now reacting to the global warming topic, so I have formulated my "5 Stages of Climate Grief" as follows…


STAGE
The "5 stages of grief" that Elizabeth Kubler-Ross defined in the 70’s
1
The first stage DENIAL, are the people that simply do not believe the science that the earth is warming, or secondarily that humans are the cause. Despite seeing a 50 year record of global atmospheric CO2 rising every year since 1957, and global air temperatures of the last dozen years in a row being the warmest in a millennium, they dismiss these trends as natural variability. These people see no reason to disturb the status quo. Most people rightfully started at this stage, until presented with convincing evidence. That convincing scientific evidence recently summarized in the 4th IPCC report has, according to opinion polls, dramatically reduced the number of people in Stage 1.
2
Many people jump directly from DENIAL to Stage 4, but for others, the next Stage 2, is ANGER, and is manifested by wild comments like "I refuse to live in a treehouse in the dark and eat nuts and berries." Because of my public speeches, I receive my share of hate mail, including being labeled a "bloviating idiot," from individuals that clearly are incensed at the thought of substantially altering their lifestyle. My local newspaper has frequent letters to the editor from people angry to the point of irrational statements hinting darkly about the potential end of modern civilization.
3
Stage 3 is BARGAINING. When they reach this stage many people (such as self-righteous radio talk show hosts) who used to be very public deniers of global warming begin making statements that warming won"t be all that bad, it might make a place like Montana "more comfortable." It is true that the building heating requirements for my hometown Missoula have decreased by about 9% since 1950 due to milder winters. At this stage people grasp for the positive news about climate change, such as longer growing seasons, and scrupulously ignore the negative news, more intense droughts and wildfires, and no glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2030. Most importantly, at this stage people are still not willing to change lifestyle, or explore energy solutions that are less carbon intensive. They seem willing to ride out this grand global experiment and cope with whatever happens.
4
Many people at my lectures have now moved to Stage 4, DEPRESSION. They consider the acceleration of annual greenhouse gas emissions, the unprecedented speed of warming, and the necessity for international cooperation for a solution, and see the task ahead to be impossible. On my tougher days I confess to sinking back to Stage 4 myself.
5
The final stage ACCEPTANCE, are people that acknowledge the scientific facts calmly, and are now exploring solutions to drive down greenhouse gas emissions dramatically, and find non-carbon intensive energy sources. Two factors are important in moving the public from DEPRESSION to this ACCEPTANCE stage.
Dr. Steve Running "5 Stages of Climate Grief" 3


References
1
(2018, August 17). Why so many people practice 'denialism' | CBC Radio - CBC.ca. Retrieved May 27, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/the-sunday-edition-august-19-2018-1.4784795/why-so-many-people-practice-denialism-1.4788057
2
(2019, May 17). The Dangers of Denialism | CBC Radio - CBC.ca. Retrieved May 27, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-dangers-of-denialism-1.5140231  
3
(n.d.). Five Stages of Climate Grief - Friends of Two Rivers. Retrieved May 27, 2019, from https://www.friendsof2rivers.org/dr.-steve-running-5-stages-of-climate-grief.html  

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Why so many people practice 'denialism’


A segment of the CBC “The Sunday Edition” program, broadcast on August 19, 2018, inspired this curation of articles by asking the question “ Why so many people practice 'denialism’ ?”.
Denial

Keith Kahn-Harris, a lecturer at Birkbeck College, University of London and at Leo Baeck College, and an associate fellow at the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, offers ideas from his latest book, called Denial: The Unspeakable Truth. Keith Kahn-Harris has a theory about why so many people reject scientific consensus and documented historical fact.
Some issues

He calls it denialism and argues that it is making the practice of politics and public policy more difficult and divisive.
Truth seeking

Statements that are backed by denialism include:
  • The Holocaust never happened. 
  • The planet isn’t warming. 
  • Vaccines cause autism. 
  • There is no such thing as AIDS. 
  • The Earth is flat. 
The BBC recently reported that measles cases hit a record high in Europe.
Dr Nedret Emiroglu, from the WHO, said: "This partial setback demonstrates that every under-immunised person remains vulnerable no matter where they live and every country must keep pushing to increase coverage and close immunity gaps."
Italy's upper house of parliament recently voted through legislation to abolish the law that makes vaccination mandatory for children before they start school. The amendment will mean parents of unvaccinated children will no longer face fines.
Jeremy Hance, a leading environmental reporter, and occasional contributor to ALERT, reports a trend in temperature that predicts it will be “unseasonably hot till 2022”.
While the prediction for the next 5 years is anything but good, it may provide a political opportunity to convince leaders and the public of the urgency of combating global warming.  Perhaps unsurprisingly, humans are more easily convinced of the reality of global warming when it happens to be hot outside.
Keith Kahn-Harris writes in the Guardian, about trends in recent years where the term ‘denialism” has been used to describe a number of fields of “scholarship”, whose scholars engage in audacious projects to hold back, against seemingly insurmountable odds, the findings of an avalanche of research.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/781D/production/_103094703_measles-spl.jpg

They argue that the Holocaust (and other genocides) never happened, that anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change is a myth, that Aids either does not exist or is unrelated to HIV, that evolution is a scientific impossibility, and that all manner of other scientific and historical orthodoxies must be rejected.
Not all denialists are taking these steps towards open acknowledgment of their desires. In some fields, the commitment to repressing desire remains strong. We are not yet at a stage when a climate change denier can come out and say, proudly, “Bangladesh will be submerged, millions will suffer as a result of anthropogenic climate change, but we must still preserve our carbon-based way of life, no matter what the cost.” Nor are anti-vaxxers ready to argue that, even though vaccines do not cause autism, the death of children from preventable diseases is a regrettable necessity if we are to be released from the clutches of Big Pharma.
The work to develop denialist arguments involves action to produce “scientific facts” that support anti-orthodox claims. The “pursuit of truth” may be available as a common starting point for co-operation between opposing “scholarship”. Let’s hope so.

References

(2018, August 17). Why so many people practice 'denialism' | CBC Radio - CBC.ca. Retrieved August 19, 2018, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/the-sunday-edition-august-19-2018-1.4784795/why-so-many-people-practice-denialism-1.4788057
(2018, May 1). Denial: The Unspeakable Truth - Keith Kahn Harris. Retrieved August 19, 2018, from http://www.kahn-harris.org/books/denial-unspeakable-truth/
(2018, August 3). Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth | News | The Guardian. Retrieved August 19, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-to-reject-the-truth
(2018, August 20). Measles cases hit record high in Europe - BBC News - BBC.com. Retrieved August 20, 2018, from https://www.bbc.com/news/health-45246049
(2018, August 19). Tonight's Weather Forecast: Unseasonably Hot Till 2022 — ALERT. Retrieved August 21, 2018, from http://alert-conservation.org/issues-research-highlights/2018/8/19/tonights-weather-forecast-unseasonably-hot-till-2022