tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post8164099334306454008..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: Climate change is our grand narrative nowKurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-75186792153695182202015-12-07T11:38:21.168-05:002015-12-07T11:38:21.168-05:00Personally, I don't think climate change is or...Personally, I don't think climate change is or should be our grand narrative. Rather, unchecked overpopulation is a grand narrative that drives increased fossil-fuel use (thus CO2 and methane emissions), accelerated mineral extraction, forest clearing, species endangerment, aquifer depletion, and so on. U.S. environmentalists have tended to adopt climate change conceptually as THE overarching anti-conservationist bogeyman, while having almost nary a peep to say constructively about three billion becoming four billion becoming five billion becoming six billion becoming seven billion with more on the way. The climate change focus seems to me a way to blame oil companies, Keystone pipeliners, climate denialists, Republican presidential candidates, etc., thereby avoiding Pogo blaming. ("We have met the enemy, and he is us.") Climate change is very much a big deal, but it's not the only big deal. (We were very fortunate, for instance, to get the ozone layer issue reasonably under control.) 1970s environmentalism had a much better and broader conservationist perspective than we have now. In my humble opinion.Chris Kuykendallnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-74169754652073063982015-12-02T09:47:11.449-05:002015-12-02T09:47:11.449-05:00Insightful piece, hence the name "Resource In...Insightful piece, hence the name "Resource Insights", I suppose! This line caught my eye, in particular:<br /><br />"It is the fear of change and the fear of loss which is holding us back from truly addressing the existential threat of climate change."<br /><br /><br /><br />And so one must ask why loss and change send such reverberations of fear into our society? I think it has to do with collective self-identity, which is a fragile construct in need of constant affirmation. We are good, we are right - look what we've accomplished. And so change per se is tantamount to the acknowledgement that we are wrong and have been wrong all along. Progress, as currently understood, is supposed to be a one-way street, deterministic, inexorable. Clive Hamilton, in his book "Requiem for a Species" deals with with this psychologically induced affliction of character in an entire chapter entitled "The Consumer Self". <br /><br />The current interpretation of progress is firmly rooted in material progress, and that is the heart of the issue, because as we of the choir all well know, the relentless acceleration of material progress is simply incongruent with limits. This is so simple to acknowledge (notice I did not say "believe"!), yet this acknowledgement itself is seen as an existential threat. We can spill as much well-intentioned ink or transmit as many electrons as we might in the name of reasonable argument and discourse, but we are unlikely to penetrate the solidified amber of current societal consciousness.<br /><br />This is why, in most public discourse, all the legitimate and approved discussion swirls around within the circumscribed frame of abstraction, number and measure, statistics, data and metrics. Even as climate change is a "wicked problem", nestled within a hierarchy of other wicked problems (overshoot itself being the patriarch of the family!), we approach it from a limited, insufficient perspective, as though it was simply an engineering or managerial issue. <br /><br />I find it ironic and strangely revealing that in recent public chatter regarding "refugees" or "terrorists", out comes the "values" card. But somehow, in equivalent discussions about climate change, it's all number and measure and certainly not "our values". What kind of publicly embodied schizophrenia is this? If we did invoke "our values", we might run the risk of seeing that "our values" are in large part the root cause of the apparently insoluble problem. And so we rationalize obfuscation, extend and pretend, and carry on with our lives such as they are.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-13442972204837750502015-12-01T14:17:06.870-05:002015-12-01T14:17:06.870-05:00Kurt,
I love virtually everything you write, but...Kurt, <br /><br />I love virtually everything you write, but this one is one of my favorites. It hits all the right notes. <br /><br />I'll be recording this post and, probably tomorrow, adding it to my "Grace Limits" page: <br /><br />http://thegreatstory.org/grace-limits-audios.html<br /><br />Keep up the great writing!<br /><br />Warmly, and getting warmer every year,<br /><br />~ MichaelMichael Dowdhttp://thegreatstory.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-40975606269414798512015-11-29T21:24:08.988-05:002015-11-29T21:24:08.988-05:00Well, people must have their doom. And with the su...Well, people must have their doom. And with the success of drill-baby-drill, I suppose all we have left is waiting around for some form of climate doom. Just takes way too long though, it will be decades before property owners on the Outer Banks of NC will need to even think about it. Climate change just doesn't have the kick of peak oil.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-56285084920485597352015-11-29T12:25:56.158-05:002015-11-29T12:25:56.158-05:00Well said, but wrong about one assertion. Our abil...Well said, but wrong about one assertion. Our ability to "grow in our social, artistic, intellectual and spiritual lives" also depends on our energy consumption. Without the energy to support the specialists who concentrate on the advance of intellectual pursuits, those arts will fade away. Knowledge contained in books that are never read has vanished. Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01251330546889158364noreply@blogger.com