October 15, 2009

Win the argument by making the Conversation on Global Warming more Positive

The desert grows three miles a year, and it just grows. I put my pain in a jar and it will be full tomorrow.

I imagine every generation needs something to be afraid of. Generally every generation does that with the guidance of their government, elected or otherwise. I'll leave the research on that one for you. But to quote Charlie Haughey, erstwhile Irish Taoiseach and fucking crook,; "The only way to keep people in line is to scare the shit out of them". Okay, well maybe *he* didn't say that, but it was a sample used in a Fatima Mansions song many years ago and for some reason, I always thought he said it.
Damn, now all the rightwingers and those suffering from Cognitive Dissonance will know I'm confused and not take this article seriously at all. What am I thinking...
Nothing, soon at least. Well not too soon, I hope, but some day.
But what about my offspring? What about them? What will they fear? Will it be the same as I've done? Will their fear come real, or as was once famously said they will instead fear "fear itself"?
Is there a reason what we really fear is what the Bossmen tell us to fear, and when we start to fear something a bit more tangible, out of the control of the Bossman, the Bossman tends to play it down? I'm sure there are examples throughout history, but despite my best efforts as a child, I never became a history scholar. Pity, I might have a warmer complexion and no RSI.
(Partly) Seriously, because this post was inspired by Today's 'Blog Action Day', I wonder are people now finally taking control of their lives enough to finally fear something which isn't a fear created by a Government? Is Global Warming the Monkey on all our backs which the Governments can't invent a war, a terrorist or an invisible enemy to displace? Well they, or at least their naysaying lackeys, are certainly trying very hard to do so.
But those of us who understand the potential for long term disaster - i.e. after most of us are already mouldering - seem to be sitting back recently. We are allowing those who, like the Speculator, only are interested in their own short term benefit take the lead with the conversation. I could say 'it's time to take it back', but I don't think we ever LOST the conversation. Instead, as usual, perhaps we direct the conversation instead only to those who would listen. Preaching to the converted as it were. I see - and do - this all the time.
So I think that's what we need to change. Find the best conversation to have with everyone at a level which everyone understands and start pitching a positive message. Scare tactics of huge increases in sea levels, massive, storms, huge fire seasons etc. while they may be true, tend to create too much fear in peoples minds. They've been done, and the message will still be there as the sword dangling over our heads. But now, I think its time to instead talk about what certain changes in behaviour, lifestyle and engagement with others can, over time, achieve to avert these dangers we have been talking about. Else there is a danger the target audience will put their potential pain in a jar and hide it there like the ostrich does with his head.
I've discussed this before at a previous post, and suggested some actions, but now I'm canvassing for input on what the new conversation looks like. A large enough percentage of the population understands Global Warming now, and of those who don't there is damn good chance a large percentage never will. For the others, the best way now must be to share the message on how personal change plus demanding change from their politicians can make the threat if not go away at least start to recede.
Examples might be how the proposed $Bn of subsidies (they call them 'credits'!) proposed for the Brown Electricity industry in Australia is an appalling false economy. And how the potential results of investing that in alternative electricity generation system, plus better, more efficient devices is a far superior investment, both in the long term to save the environment, but importantly, also in the short term to continue to provide jobs and investment in the 'now' economy. And I don't mean the gimmicky type of conversation, of which some of the GetUp stuff is a good (bad) example. It makes a point, but does it come out with an action?

I'll not go into why I think some subsidies are probably required, though I'd prefer if they too weren't given. And I don't pretend to know the full extent of the science behind Global Warming, though I agree with what I do know of what I've been told and disagree with the do nothing shysters. But I fear that if the conversation which has been held for the last 4 or 5 years doesn't adjust in the next 12 - 18 months, ennui will set in and the naysayers will win the day.
I'm amazed by their ostrich like behaviour especially since, just like ours, their Grandchildren will continue to see the desert grow three miles a year. But they don't really care, do they? It's just someone elses pain, which may as well be in a jar. By the way, Charlie wouldn't have went along with the deniers...at least in Public.

A girl consumed by fire We all know her desire From the plans that she has made I have her on a promise Immerse me in your splendor All the plans that i have made

1 comment:

  1. Very good point.

    Motivation through fear is no way to effect a meaningful change. And those who use fear in such a way a rarely worth following.

    Creation of jobs through environmental initiatives could well be a chance to break the current thinking that green and economic development policies cannot coexist.