<
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/24/we-need-a-dash-of-hope-but-is-too-much-diverting-our-gaze-from-the-perils-of-the-climate-crisis>
"If despair is the most unforgivable sin, then hope is surely the most abused
virtue. That observation feels particularly apposite as we enter the Cop
season, that time of United Nations megaconferences at the end of every year,
when national leaders feel obliged to convince us the future will be better,
despite growing evidence to the contrary.
Climate instability and nature extinction are making the Earth an uglier,
riskier and more uncertain place, desiccating water supplies, driving up the
price of food, displacing humans and non-humans, battering cities and
ecosystems with ever fiercer storms, floods, heatwaves, droughts and forest
fires. Still worse could be in store as we approach or pass a series of
dangerous tipping points for Amazon rainforest dieback, ocean circulation
breakdown, ice-cap collapse and other unimaginably horrible, but ever more
possible, catastrophes.
Yet, apparently we must still have hope. It is mandatory. Change is impossible,
we are told, without positive thinking and a belief in a better future. That is
the message of just about every politician and business leader I have
interviewed in close to two decades on the environment beat.
And we will hear it again, at the UN biodiversity Cop16 in Cali, Colombia,
which kicked off this week, then at the climate Cop29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, in a
few weeks’ time. If past international confabs are any guide, there is little
prospect of concrete action in the here and now, but there will be ever-more
ambitious plans for the distant future: roadmaps, commitments, targets, reasons
to hope. And, of course, we will hear it most loudly in the US presidential
election, which is always about which candidate is most faithful to the
American dream of endless expansion.
But what if it is hope that is the problem? What if hope is the antidepressant
that has been keeping us all comfortably numb when we have every right to be
sad, worried, stirred to action or just plain angry?
These are not questions most of us want to ask. Me included, though most people
who read environmental coverage assume the opposite because the trends we
report on are relentlessly grim. Some of my
Guardian colleagues joke that my
job is to make everyone feel miserable.
Who wants to do that? But I often do wake up filled with dread. And while
exhortations to lift my spirits or look at things in a more positive light are
no doubt well-intended, it does make me bristle a little. Isn’t it healthy to
be concerned, as long as it is not debilitating? Isn’t it part of a process
towards seeking change?
New research reveals that people who are experiencing climate-related distress
are more likely to engage in collective action. History, by contrast, shows
that manufactured optimism can lead to complacency and the shirking of
responsibilities."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
