Remember the Future: Reframing the Climate Crisis 3
To work together to protect against inevitable effects of the climate crisis requires an expansion of the concept of "we" to include everyone on the planet, and the planet itself. But to dedicate ourselves to changes that may not benefit us, that may make things better for generations who will live after we are gone, requires another expansion of "we." That's why the climate crisis is such a test of human capacities, and the capacities of our societies. We are going to have to think and feel more comprehensively, taking into account not only the whole world now, but the whole world in the future.
A crisis caused by climate is not in itself unprecedented, at least in specific localities, but our situation may well be. Because we know more or less what is coming, and more or less what we could conceivably do, even what we should do, to reverse the process that we unthinkingly began: killing the ability of our planet to sustain our lives.
The possible outcomes of the climate crisis are of course complex, but they come down to a few basic alternatives: Human civilization may weather the crisis with comparatively minor catastrophes, while much of the rest of life on earth reshuffles: some species die off, others expand, and eventually the ecosphere rebounds and continues to flourish.
Another possibility is that human civilization may not survive, either at all or in a continuously evolving way. This is likely to be coterminous with a vastly changed flora and fauna, and very probably a marked and dangerous decrease in biological diversity.
At the end of these possibilities is the end of civilization, the end of human beings on the planet, and the end of "life as we know it", although some forms of life may continue. Even a totally dead planet as a result of the continuing alteration of the atmosphere, though that might take many many years, is not outside the realm of possibility either.
The predictions based on data and trends are not conclusive, and may never be. But the best case scenario is for imminent changes that will adversely affect portions of the planet, very probably to an extent we have not experienced in many centuries. And there are climate models that predict conditions that would mean the end of planetary life as we know it, by the end of the next century.
So what do we do about all of that? Won't we have our hands full just coping with each catastrophe as it happens?
Our society is biased towards not only the individual and the nation-state, but towards the present. Still, we are complex beings, with complex cultures, that have the equivalent of recessive traits. Much of our present-centeredness is the result of this historically unusual period of prosperity in this place, together with the persuasive mechanisms our most powerful institutions and media use on us. But we also have half-buried traditions and untried potentials. And sometimes when we remember the past, we remember the future.
This is the frame I suggest: responsibility for the future. It is deep in American history, and expressed most eloquently in the Great Law of the Haudenosaunee (Mohawk and Iroquois peoples): "In every deliberation we must consider the impact on the seventh generation to come."
We have a responsibility to the future, which means that we must find ways to alter our behavior today, including how we get and use our energy. We may not live to see the ultimate impact of these efforts on the climate crisis itself, but we do it for generations to come.
Our leaders will have to explain that for us, we passed the tipping point years ago, and we must deal with the effects of global heating. But the time lag between cause and effect can benefit future generations, if we work hard to change our behavior now. We will be doing what all good parents do, sacrificing for their children and grandchildren, unto the seventh generation to come.
But let's bring it back to today's political terms. The future used to be a concept the Democrats owned. FDR's New Deal, Truman and the Marshall Plan, JFK's New Frontier and the Apollo space program, and LBJ's Great Society, Clinton's bridge to the 21st century, defined future-oriented ideas and policies.
But now, there is only one book on the best-seller list that emphasizes the future: Winning the Future by Newt Gingrich. The Bushoids' proposals for new manned lunar and Mars programs, as insidious as they might be, are further evidence that Republicans not only own the Apocalypse and the Rapture, they are taking possession of the future.
But the greatest challenge to the future is the Climate Crisis, which the Bushwhackers deny is real. It will be one of the great challenges humankind has ever faced, and it's time for Democrats to step up and take back the future.
At this time, when we are still prosperous and still feel basically safe, if a little uneasy about the weather, it requires imagination to grasp how powerful these simple messages can be in times of stress and chaos. It is important that we concentrate on them, because there are other equally simple and powerful messages that will only destroy us. After 9-11, our leaders could have guided us in a different and better direction. Instead they guided us into a morass of illusion, fear and nationalistic xenophobia. If that happens again in response to the climate crisis, we will be lost. We may not survive the climate crisis, as a civilization, no matter what we do. But if we take the wrong course, we will make certain that civilization does not survive.
(There's a longer version of this essay here.)
A World of Falling Skies
-
Since I started posting reviews of books on the climate crisis, there have
been significant additions--so many I won't even attempt to get to all of
them. ...
3 days ago
No comments:
Post a Comment