On climate change and why we cannot really get serious policies

[nadinbrzezinski]

I have been reading a nice book on the PSYCHOLOGY of this and it struck me. We really cannot get good science based policies out of either Republicans or Democrats becuase the full thing has been demonized and politicized. By the time MOST Americans demand action from their pols it will be too late.

So we have the Clinton version, which is well, weak tea, But why is it that it is weak tea? Well, part of the problem is the politics of this. Part of the problem is that in this country (and England and Australia for the record) scientists have been made into monsters. How dare they go against the hand of the market place? How dare they want to gasp regulate any of this crap? And by the way did i mention James Hansen was kept away from NPR a few times? And he will be kept away from my local affiliate as well. I thought that was important. to point out that we keep the EXPERTS as far as possible from mass communication means. That is not a coincidence either.

We also have a media that for the sake of ahem social unity does not dare have the words climate change cross their lips after a major climate disaster. (And then there is the underlying profit motive for a few of them) Ok,. Bloomberg News did after Sandy, but it helps when the boss who owns the paper told them to. It has become a twisted sense of what is accepted as reality. And the discussion is extremely narrow... Linguistics is useful here

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

This is why her plan is such weak sauce and I hardly expect it to be implemented fully, for the record. Never mind the idea that it destroys economies has been disproven in many places, including California. (For the record, none is supposed to mention this, and widen the discussion) Oh ye of little faith, CA plan is well imprelemted and it is now even stronger. It is actually close to the Green Party's call, of 90 percent by 2050. Granted 10 points in this regard is a major difference, but the EO from Governor brown places it at 80 percent. but 33 percent is really weak sauce. We might as well not do much. (Which I suspect is the intent). And reality is that most of us will be dead by 2050, so who cares? And humans are particularly bad about planning that long term. It is a failure of evolution.

In the meantime, other nations are doing what they can. Part of it, their media is not afraid of saying... CLIMATE CHANGE. Nor are they afraid of talking to scientists and treating their people like well... adults. It helps that they are also already getting hit in major ways. We are as well, but we prefer to pretend otherwise.

I do not know what it will take for Americans to get it, but as long as this remains an ugly politics before science issue, well then... I am glad I never had children. I will not have to apologize to them for our stupid collective religious belief in the myth of the hand of the market place. And yes, as the years progress and this becomes less and less deniable, more drastic action might have to be taken. I don't have any faith that they will be taken, Yes, I consider Americans that selfish anymore. Or at least those who rule the roost and determine policy. They will fight the rest of us in the name of the quarterly profit report.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. It is all but too late, and the sick and demented thing about it is if

Carter had not been replaced by Reagan's treason, we would have gone green a long time ago and our economy would be booming.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. It is too late because of attitudes like this ^^^^^

And this is why I expect nothing to be done about it.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

7. My attitude? Dear god...you have gone off the deep end now

Please tell me you are kidding or referring to something else, otherwise you make zero sense.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Of course I have, after all I care about this shit

far more than people with kids, (by the way this is statistically correct)

[zappaman]

14. "I care about this shit far more than people with kids"

How can you even see people from that high horse of yours?

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Here...

• Why do the victims of flooding, drought, and severe storms become less willing to talk about climate change or even accept that it is real?
• Why are people who say that climate change is too uncertain to believe more easily convinced of the imminent dangers of terrorist attacks, asteroid strikes, or an alien invasion?
• Why have scientists, normally the most trusted professionals in our society, become distrusted, hated, and the targets for violent abuse?
• Why is America’s most prestigious science museum telling more than a million people a year that climate change is a natural cycle and that we can grow new organs to adapt to it?
• Why are science fiction fans, of all people, so unwilling to imagine what the future might really be like?
• Why does having children make people less concerned about climate change?
• How did a rational policy negotiation become a debating slam to be won by the wittiest and most aggressive player?
• Why can stories based on myths and lies become so compelling that a president prefers to take his climate science advice from a bestselling thriller writer rather than the National Academy of Sciences?
• And why is an oil company so much more worried about the threats posed by its slippery floors than the threats posed by its products?

Marshall, George (2014-08-19). Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change (p. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition.

So you can have that argument with him

http://www.climateconviction.org/about.html

[zappaman]

28. that has nothing to do with your air of superiority

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Alas that is exactly where it came from

it is statistically true

Email him and argue that point

Myself I found it fascinating.

And as to the rest you have to say...

[zappaman]

32. Yes, your comment is extremely condescending.

But what else is new?

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. LMAO

[YouDig]

2. The Republican Party is the reason.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. I cover this shit

it is both parties... one goes for small incremental change, the other goes La, La, La.

But it is both. And the same excuse.

The reason CA has something like AB 32, is that it was passed before it was so politicized. It would not pass today.

[YouDig]

5. It's the GOP. With GOP obstruction, it doesn't matter what the Dems are proposing.

The only way forward is either through executive actions like Obama has tried, or else to get majorities in congress. There won't be any progress otherwise.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. It is both

realize my climate action plan for the city of San Diego, was pushed forward by a Republican Mayor and a Democratic Majority City Council. It will take both. As I said I cover this shit. It is both.

Conservadems are for market solutions as much as republicans. And many of them are in the same level of denial

San Diego is starting to get hit with some pretty serious issues, so both worked for it.

[YouDig]

9. I don't know about San Diego, but nationally, it's the GOP.

I agree, some of the Joe Lieberman type Dems don't help much, though it is still better to have them than Republicans. But when it comes to people like Obama or Bernie or Hillary, making stronger proposals won't make any difference unless more Dems get elected to congress. All of them are well to the left of anything that will get passed the obstruction.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. It is both

Sorry.

And myself I am not going to give EITHER a pass anymore...

Individuals like Inhofe are special, but forgive me to say this, many conservadems do not want to regulate this becuase it iwill affect the market.

Sadly, that first sentence stretches the reality. President Obama entered office speaking seriously about climate change and the need for fidelity to science. Sadly, in the past few years, “climate change has been the Voldemort of the Obama Administration: ”The Threat-That-Must-Not-Be-Named.”” The silence from the Administration and the Obama-Biden election team on climate issues has been deafening … at least until the past few days.

http://getenergysmartnow.com/2012/09/03/democratic-party-platform-engages-climate-change/

There are many reasons for that, including the fact of who gives money to whom. Example, why is Exxon still receiving tax payer funds? It is not as if this is an emerging technology...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/01/17/big_oil_big_profits_big_tax_breaks_121262.html

So do not tell me it is only one side ok. Actions speak louder than lofty language.

[YouDig]

11. What can the Dems do when the GOP blocks everything?

I agree that, in an ideal world, we would want to be doing more than what the Dems are proposing. But that makes no difference. The thing that stands in the way is the GOP, not the unwillingness of Dems to propose bolder solutions.

Obama has actually done quite a bit through executive orders, but there's a limit to what that can accomplish, and there's also the Supreme Court. Blaming both sides for the inaction is inaccurate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. That excuse stopped washing with many of us a while ago

find a new one... I mean that

For the record, as Ornstein has found, the lion's share is indeed Republicans, but at some point, Democrats have to own their side of this mess... called DC dysfunction

[YouDig]

13. But am I wrong? Really, what can the Dems do without more seats?

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. First off, they can take to the bully pulpit

and ALLOW people like James Hansen to talk to media as early and often as possible.

They can take a cue from OTHER COUNTRIES where every time there is a climate disaster, they have actual scientists explain how it might be related or is related ON TV.

When was the last time you saw the head of NOAA on CNN explaining this> For the record the equivalent of NOAA in Mexico has been on CNN en Espanol a few times. Here we have so many approval layers that you really cannot get these people... for fear of donors, and all that shit

As I said, there are many things they could do to engage the public at all levels mind you. IN CA after the last serious fires, my Board of Supers head, did I mention was a republican, addressed local tv cameras and gasp, WENT THERE.

It is not just legislation where you can take action. I personally suspect at this point they don't want to, see those tax funded subsidies.

[YouDig]

17. OK, yes, they could take to the bully pulpit more, true.

But now we're talking marketing, not policy, and given how crazy the GOP is, I don't think marketing is going to sway them much. And I think the idea that they are shying away because of donors is unfounded. Some of the big Democratic donors are big environmentalists, for example Tom Steyer has made it his basically only issue now.

I think Obama has done as well as anyone could have on the environment, and better than a lot of people who may have talked about the issue more.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Hold it, you keep blaming the GOP

and I keep pointing to policy makers actually doing something about it.

As i said, people are getting tired and sick of the excuses. Myself, I am near the twilight of my years, so I could give a shit about it. I still do what I can as a person. The kids are not going to take these excuses as valid. As one young organizer put it. climate change will make the Supreme Court academic. and you know what? They are correct.

As I said, I cover this shit, like for real. I am not going to give a pass to one party or the other becuase of so called party loyalty.

[YouDig]

19. Because they are the ones to blame.

Obama actually did something about it. Not just talk, and not just propose things that didn't go anywhere in congress.

Call it an "excuse" if you want, but it's a valid excuse, because it's true. The GOP blocks everything related to the environment.

If Bernie gets into office, sure he might propose a carbon tax and aggressive renewable goals and all that. It would go nowhere in congress due to the GOP. At that point would you blame the GOP?

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. So let me get this straight

I have policy makers doing something about it but they are blocking it at the same time.

For the record, they are doing something about it becuase it makes sense from a dollars and cents perspective. Though I suspect a few of my supers are slowly getting converted to the reality of it. The drought really did a number. And it really has crated a year round fire season locally which is costing billions of dollars.

And the same process is going to happen in Congress, we at least should hope.

See when you cover politics, and actually get to talk to actual, GASP policy makers, you realize they are not demons, and that people act in what they believe it is their best interest. Climate change, is becoming more of a reality regardless of party. But doing something at the policy level requires more than just pointing fingers at the other wide. Tough that is one of the reasons I do not expect a Clinton administration, assuming she gets elected. to really do squat about it.

He said, she said, we get nothing done.

[YouDig]

23. I don't know about the San Diego situation, so I'll take your word on that.

I'm talking about the national level, and there the GOP are clearly the problem.

I don't expect huge progress from a Hillary administration, or from a Bernie administration, because of the GOP. And I definitely don't think there would be much difference between Hillary and Bernie in terms of what actually gets accomplished. That goes for other issues as well. But, for example, getting another liberal justice would help in terms of executive orders getting blocked. And if the Dems pick up seats in congress, then something might happen.

You may be right about California, I don't know, but at the national level, it's the GOP that's in the way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. But what you are missing is that what is happening at the local level

and state level should translate to national action sooner or later. But it won't until we collectively stop hating the other side and start demanding things get done... no, not because you are a democrat, or republican, or independent, or green or libertarian, but becuase you are an American and in this case, a member of the human race.

And that is what you are missing,. We are giving them the excuses they need to do nothing, unless they have financial interests to do something.

This dysfunction partly flows from deep partisans on both sides.

[YouDig]

26. I think we're just going to have to disagree.

I have a hard time blaming partisanship for the situation when it is so clear that one of the two parties so clearly the problem.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. I seriously recommend reading into this as an academic issue

http://government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/psac/sp08/Enns_McAvoy_April08_PSAC.pdf

For example.

But the best classic is this

http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional/dp/0465096204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1462315713&sr=8-1&keywords=ornstein

And I see they just updated it. The book is a critical read. Yes the Rs have the lion's share of the blame, but they are not alone.

And we as a people need to start thinking beyond party...

[Cheese Sandwich]

16. Very well said. Rec x 1000.

[Meldread]

22. I agree 100% and rec'ed your post.

People don't have any clue how extreme we have to get to actually fight Climate Change. It is literally going to take a revolution on the scale the human species has never before seen, and this revolution has to be global.

In order to halt the progress of climate change, lots of people are going to suffer. To avoid that suffering, politicians are going to put it off because it is politically unpopular. Then as a result, when the shit really hits the fan and the people finally demand action, there will have to be EVEN MORE suffering because the measures will have to be even more extreme.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. exactly

[taught_me_patience]

29. Look at past threads about how many DUers drive big ass trucks

and you'll find the answer on why we cannot get serious about climate change.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Actually I think until those who do policy start treating people like adults...

by the way, those big assed trucks are getting more fuel efficient. but a lot of people do not know why that is related to that kind of a policy.

For the record, we drive a small jeep to cover wild fires in my county, which are a direct consequence of climate change, in how more frequent and intense they are. I could not do that in a hybrid. For the record that is the other vehicle we own and when we replace it, it will be for another hybrid. I am thinking Prius C by the way. And my jeep is actually, scary I know, more efficient than a lot of the car fleet. Partly it is the model year. Go figure...

By the way the adult part is my own theory, been reading: Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change, and I was struck at some comments about English speaking countries. And you really cannot find a denialist in Mexico City.

1.- They have been hit hard already. We have, but we still don't say it... katrina and Sandy are good examples, but so are a few droughts, and wild fires, or recent flash floods in Texas.

2.- The government has made this a central point of national policy and scientists are on national tv often. Imagine if James Hansen was on your tv explaining this...

[Rebkeh]

34. My understanding is that it's a lack of political will from all parties

And because the ff industry has the whole place locked down. Nobody is able or willing to take them on because it's a quagmire with too much at stake, this is a kid gloves situation. Very delicate (so I gather). I don't know what it would take but I do know it's an "all hands on deck" crisis. We are all crew. The people are gonna have to be an overwhelming force, led by somebody or a group of somebodies on the inside with serious IDGAF guts. I'm talking about tens of thousands of people showing up. The onus is on us, not one man or woman saying, "I got this." Normally, I'd be okay with that but not for this.

Also, we would have to talk seriously about our consumption and since consumption drives American capitalism ... that's a touchy conversation. Very, very touchy. Our econony is held together by energy consumption so ... It's complicated. It can't be a solution of policy alone - we literally have to change our culture and all that it embodies. I mean all of it. We have to change ourselves. One thing is for sure, at some point, we won't have a choice. Change or die - when things get real, people change.

I know I'm not saying anything we all don't already know.

[riderinthestorm]

35. BIG K&R! Bravo and right on!!!

We're in the 11th hour. Incrementalism is as disastrous as climate change deniers.