tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/naomi-klein-12571/articlesNaomi Klein – The Conversation2023-09-11T20:09:03Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2099902023-09-11T20:09:03Z2023-09-11T20:09:03ZIn Doppelganger, Naomi Klein says the world is broken: conspiracy theorists ‘get the facts wrong but often get the feelings right’<p>Idly googling myself some years ago, I came upon an unusually glowing reference to one of my academic papers. “Masterpiece is an overused word,” the reviewer wrote, “but this Proustian evocation is indeed a masterpiece.”</p>
<p>Something was amiss. My paper was good, but not <em>that</em> good. And there was nothing particularly Proustian about it either. Whatever exquisite sensibility I might possess was well hidden beneath a scholarly armour of logic, evidence and jargon.</p>
<p>Reading further resolved the puzzle. “Nicky Haslam has known everyone from Greta Garbo to Cole Porter to the Royal Family.” Curses! I had been confused with my namesake, the famous <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicky_Haslam">British interior designer</a> and scourge of vulgarity, and my paper with one of his books.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Review: Doppelganger: A Trip into the Mirror World – Naomi Klein (Allen Lane)</em></p>
<hr>
<p>The experience of being confused with someone else is probably universal. Names and appearances are fallible markers of personal identity, especially as populations grow and we become exposed to a dizzying multitude of other people.</p>
<p>These confusions are usually trivial and droll, but sometimes they become sinister and destabilising. The idea that we have a double, someone who treads on the toes of our uniqueness, perhaps deliberately, can create deep anxieties and resentments.</p>
<h2>The two Naomis</h2>
<p>Such is the experience of <a href="https://naomiklein.org/">Naomi Klein</a>, Canadian author of a string of anti-capitalist blockbusters. <a href="https://naomiklein.org/no-logo/">No Logo</a> (1999) attacked corporate malfeasance, <a href="https://naomiklein.org/the-shock-doctrine/">The Shock Doctrine</a> (2007) catalogued the exploitation of disasters to roll out neoliberal policies, and 2019’s <a href="https://naomiklein.org/on-fire/">On Fire</a> marked her increasing focus on the climate crisis.</p>
<p>In her new book, <a href="https://www.penguin.com.au/books/doppelganger-9780241621318">Doppelganger</a>, Klein makes her experience of being confused with another high-profile author, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Wolf">Naomi Wolf</a>, the stimulus for an extended meditation on the nature of doubles, mirror-worlds, and the political and personal challenges of threatened identities.</p>
<p>Along the way, Klein returns to several of the animating themes of her previous books. Capitalism is the ultimate cause of the dire societal challenges we face, she argues, and people on both sides of the political mirror – right-wing conspiracists and liberal critics alike – fail to recognise it because they are mired in individualist ways of thinking.</p>
<p>The backbone of Klein’s personal story is simple enough. “Other Naomi”, her “big-haired doppelganger”, is the American author of feminist bestseller <a href="https://www.penguin.com.au/books/the-beauty-myth-9780099595748">The Beauty Myth</a> and was once a celebrated and very public figure on the broad left. Because Wolf was older and more established than Klein, being mistaken for her initially brought a frisson of celebrity. </p>
<p>That all changed when Wolf’s writing veered away from sexual liberation and female empowerment into <a href="https://www.vox.com/2014/10/5/6909837/naomi-wolf-isis-ebola-scotland-conspiracy-theories">conspiracies about</a> Ebola, ISIS and (<a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/162702/naomi-wolf-madness-feminist-icon-antivaxxer">most recently</a>) the COVID pandemic, complete with fear mongering about vaccines, mask mandates and impending tyranny. </p>
<p>Her transformation – or derailment, as Klein would have it – has seen her teaming up with far-right media personalities like <a href="https://theconversation.com/stephen-bannons-world-dangerous-minds-in-dangerous-times-100373">Steve Bannon</a> and issuing torrents of misinformation and paranoia.</p>
<p>Appalled at being confused with Wolf, Klein developed a dogged obsession. She followed Wolf’s social media, watched in horror her televised appearances, and pursued her down the rabbit hole – or through the looking glass – of conspiracist thinking. The intensity of Klein’s anti-crush and the tenacity of her pursuit seem to have surprised her, but it delivered insights into the nature of doubles and evil twins. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/seeing-double-the-origins-of-the-evil-twin-in-gothic-horror-and-hollywood-98196">Seeing double: the origins of the 'evil twin' in Gothic horror and Hollywood</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Doppelganger as ‘shadow self’</h2>
<p>Translated from the German, a doppelganger is literally a “double-goer” or “double-walker”: someone who eerily accompanies us as a kind of shadow-self. Literary doppelgangers tend to be uncanny presences, violent alter egos, wicked impersonators or tormentors who sometimes turn out to be figments of their victim’s madness. </p>
<p>To philosophers and psychoanalysts, doppelgangers illuminate the existential wobbliness that goes with having our sense of unique selfhood undermined. As Golyadkin tells his replica in Dostoevsky’s <a href="https://archive.org/details/threeshortnovels01dost/page/n5/mode/2up">The Double</a>, “Either you or I, but both together we cannot be!”, not long before he is carted off to an asylum while his double blows mocking farewell kisses.</p>
<p>Klein’s response to other Naomi is similarly unsettled and goes beyond merely wishing to correct the record whenever she is misidentified. Klein feels her personal brand has been diluted, while acknowledging the irony of caring about her brand, given her fierce critique of corporate branding in No Logo (1999). </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oeTgLKNb5R0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Naomi Klein fiercely critiqued corporate branding in No Logo, which spawned a documentary.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nearly a quarter of a century later, she argues that personal branding, amplified by the growing desire to curate a unique digital self, entrenches fixed and phony selves and stands in the way of forming alliances with others.</p>
<p>Despite admitting she cares too much about her own brand, Klein deals with Wolf’s encroachment head-on by attacking her new politics. She takes aim at the “Mirror World” that congealed around resistance to vaccine and mask mandates, a new coalition of far-right <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-divided-america-including-the-15-who-are-maga-republicans-splits-on-qanon-racism-and-armed-patrols-at-polling-places-193378">MAGA folk</a> and far-out health and wellness influencers and new-agers, united by a concern with body purity and a fondness for overheated rhetoric. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/heather-rose-writes-with-raw-beauty-about-trauma-and-hardcore-spiritual-work-so-why-does-it-leave-me-cold-195425">Heather Rose writes with raw beauty about trauma and 'hardcore spiritual work' – so why does it leave me cold?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Calling out conspiracists</h2>
<p>Klein bristles at anti-vaxxers’ claims of a genocidal “hygiene dictatorship” and their appropriation of Holocaust imagery, “as if the Nazi atrocity of <a href="https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-biological-state-nazi-racial-hygiene-1933-1939">treating human beings as germs</a> and treating germs as germs was in any way the same thing”. </p>
<p>She also calls out bad-faith appropriation of civil rights discourse by white conspiracists, as when Wolf refers to one of her anti-mask protests as a <a href="https://time.com/3691383/woolworths-sit-in-history/">lunch-counter sit-in</a>, or when vaccination requirements are <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-20/experts-insight-into-covid-vaccine-mandate-protests/100707434">described as</a> “medical apartheid”. </p>
<p>Klein also hears less-than-faint echoes of fascism and colonial callousness in arguments the pandemic was nature doing its work of thinning out the weak and infirm – and in the blind eye turned to disproportionate death rates among people of colour.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/mondays-medical-myth-the-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism-3739">Mistaken beliefs</a> linking vaccines and autism were a prequel to this dynamic, Klein suggests. In both cases, a health initiative takes the blame for troubling events: a diagnosis commonly taken as a tragedy in a society “that is very generous with diagnoses and awfully stingy with actual help” and a major economic and social disruption. A righteous hunt for villains ensues, heightened by the primal fear of shadowy, malevolent forces.</p>
<p>What might have driven Wolf into this parallel universe where Twitter, YouTube and Instagram are replaced by the far-right social media alternatives of Gettr, Rumble and Parler? Klein offers an equation: “<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-types-of-narcissist-are-there-a-psychology-expert-sets-the-record-straight-207610">Narcissism</a> (Grandiosity) + <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-your-social-media-habit-is-probably-not-an-addiction-new-research-158888">Social media addiction</a> + <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-the-midlife-crisis-a-real-thing-105510">Midlife crisis</a> ÷ Public shaming = Right-wing meltdown”. (Though surely the ÷ should be an ×: shaming exacerbates rather than dampens meltdowns.) </p>
<p>Klein argues Wolf is simply chasing clout and “digital dopamine”, a chase hardly confined to one side of politics.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/white-supremacist-and-far-right-ideology-underpin-anti-vax-movements-172289">White supremacist and far right ideology underpin anti-vax movements</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Blame on both sides</h2>
<p>Klein’s denunciations of Wolf and her allies are full-throated, but she doesn’t see her own side as blameless. Progressives have abandoned some issues to conservatives and have been overly reactive rather than setting their own agenda. Centrists have failed to deliver action to match their fine words. </p>
<p>Citizens of developed societies have quietly denied the magnitude of our dependence on – and complicity with – global injustice.</p>
<p>What needs to happen, according to Klein, is for people to realise the true source of their problems. Conspiracy theorists are half right: they “get the facts wrong but often get the feelings right”. The feeling others are profiting from human misery and withholding the truth is justified, but the cause is not evil individuals – it’s capitalism itself. </p>
<p>Doppelganger argues that capitalist “<a href="https://theconversation.com/atlas-shrugged-ayn-rands-hero-burns-the-world-down-when-he-doesnt-get-his-way-her-fans-run-the-world-should-we-worry-192510">hyper-individualism</a>” is the root of many of our troubles, and a value held by conspiratorial rightists and liberals alike. It breeds a culture that sees all failings as personal and stands in the way of us uniting to act for the greater good. </p>
<p>The solution, Klein maintains, in a tone that becomes increasingly prophetic as the book progresses, is to think systemically about oppression and inequality, and to decentre ourselves. “There is an intimate relationship between our overinflated selves and our under-cared-for planet,” she writes. </p>
<p>Later chapters take up this challenge, in discussions of settler colonialism, antisemitism and the climate emergency. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-live-in-a-time-of-late-capitalism-but-what-does-that-mean-and-whats-so-late-about-it-191422">We live in a time of 'late capitalism'. But what does that mean? And what's so late about it?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Doubling down too much</h2>
<p>Klein’s book is a compelling critique of polarising trends in American and global politics, constructed around a relatable personal narrative. Its anti-capitalist message and sometimes utopian faith in socialist solutions will not be universally embraced, of course. But Klein delivers it with a powerful and passionate voice.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=923&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=923&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=923&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1160&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1160&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546139/original/file-20230904-15-2ln6ly.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1160&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If Doppelganger has a weak point, it is in its organising idea, which strains under the load it is made to bear. The range of meanings “doppelganger” carries is extravagant, extending far beyond the realm of troublesome namesakes and lookalikes.</p>
<p>Our self-branding online selves are “an internal sort of doppelganger”. The ideal body we aspire to is a doppelganger, and so is the data footprint our online presence leaves behind, our “digital golems”. Thinking is a form of doubling, a “dialogue between me and myself”. </p>
<p>Stereotypes create doppelgangers by projecting images onto individuals: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>race, ethnicity, and gender create dangerous doubles that hover over whole categories of people – Savage. Terrorist. Thief. Whore. Property.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Children are doppelgangers of parents who fail to see them as autonomous beings. We have a second, doppelganger body that represents all the harms we cause others and our planet.</p>
<p>It’s not just individuals that have doppelgangers, but also societies, religions, nations and places. Pluralist society has a fascist doppelganger. Jews and Christians are each other’s doppelgangers. Israel is a doppelganger of antisemitic European nationalisms. New South Wales is the doppelganger of South Wales. Indeed, we all live in a “doppelganger culture. A culture crowded with various forms of doubling.”</p>
<p>Strangely, in all this multiplication of doubling, Klein has little to say about other pressing forms of duplication, such as artificial intelligences, <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-who-spread-deepfakes-think-their-lies-reveal-a-deeper-truth-119156">deepfakes</a> and identity theft. </p>
<p>Her use of the doppelganger concept is so fruitful, so capable of capturing any kind of similarity and difference, that it becomes almost empty. Doppelganger succeeds despite the occasionally laboured use of this metaphor, rather than because of it.</p>
<p>In the end, Klein finds some almost grudging sympathy for her doppelganger, acknowledging an act of political bravery (a <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/naomi-wolf-argues-that-what-really-is-at-stake-in-gaza-is-israel-s-soul">2014 stand</a> against Palestinian civilian casualties) and recalling an early starstruck meeting. Wolf is not a double of the haunting variety – she has apparently rebuffed Klein’s invitations for a public interview – but she has left her psychic mark and the reader is the better for it. </p>
<p>Ironically, being paired in this engrossing book leaves the two Naomis more conjoined than ever, like two magnets flipped from repulsion to a strange attraction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209990/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Haslam receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>Naomi Klein uses her frequent confusion with ‘doppelganger’ Naomi Wolf to spark an exploration of doubles, mirror-worlds, and the gulf between left and right.Nick Haslam, Professor of Psychology, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1671812021-10-25T20:47:36Z2021-10-25T20:47:36ZPopular climate change documentaries often privilege wealthier countries and offer unbalanced coverage<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427869/original/file-20211021-19-rf9wte.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C116%2C2048%2C1069&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Leonardo DiCaprio, right, speaks with Earth scientist and deputy director of NASA's Goddard Sciences and Exploration Directorate, Piers Sellers, for the climate change documentary, 'Before the Flood.'
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Flickr/NASA Goddard Space Flight Center)</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When world leaders meet in Glasgow, Scotland, for the 2021 <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">UN Climate Change Conference (COP26)</a> this November, climate change will again be in the spotlight. </p>
<p>Media coverage of climate change plays an important role in shaping the public narrative on the climate crisis. In his book, <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/who-speaks-for-the-climate/F0B6B07E7502BA6AC577C989381A246C"><em>Who Speaks for the Climate? Making Sense of Media Reporting on Climate Change</em></a>, environmental studies researcher Maxwell Boykoff observes that “media representations of climate change are produced, negotiated and disseminated through unequal power and inequalities of access and resources.” </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-news-sally-buzbee-race-and-ethnicity-greta-thunberg-business-6a853a81f34164ab85713e68a889976d"><em>The Associated Press</em> drew criticism</a> for cropping Ugandan climate activist Vanessa Nakate out of a group photo at the World Economic Forum in 2020 to centre four white youth activists, including Greta Thunberg. </p>
<p>In response to the controversy, Nakate observed that her experience was part of a larger pattern where mainstream media rarely gives individuals from countries facing the worst impacts of climate change an opportunity to tell their stories.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1269199635911979009"}"></div></p>
<p>One form of media that is becoming increasingly popular is the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.06.006">climate change documentary</a>. Documentaries tell powerful stories in engaging ways and often feature popular celebrities <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.596">in order to bring star power</a> to important issues. Even though these films reach large audiences, there have been few studies that examine the narratives they create, and how they do so. </p>
<h2>Narrating the climate crisis in documentary films</h2>
<p>In a recent study, we examined 10 climate change documentaries that have emerged since the release of Al Gore’s award-winning and genre-shaping film <em>An Inconvenient Truth</em> in 2006. </p>
<p>To understand how the story of climate change is told in popular documentaries, we selected films focusing on the climate crisis. Some of the criteria determining which films we chose included: films produced in English between 2006 and 2019; films released in a form that allowed widespread viewership such as theatrical release, screening on a major television network or availability on popular streaming platforms such as Netflix; and films that looked at climate change on a global scale and portrayed multiple geographic regions.</p>
<p>Most climate change documentaries we studied follow a similar formula: a central narrator — who is usually white and male — learns about climate change alongside the viewer, meeting people around the world.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A select list of 10 climate change documentaries and their narrators" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422310/original/file-20210921-19-1ou3r1x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In 10 climate change documentaries studied, only one had a female narrator and only one was narrated by a racialized person.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Paige Bennett)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of the 10 narrators in the films we studied, only one, Naomi Klein in <em><a href="https://thischangeseverything.org/">This Changes Everything</a></em>, is female, and only one film, <em><a href="https://www.timetochoose.com/">Time to Choose</a></em>, is narrated by a racialized person. Eight of the 10 films are narrated by white men from the Global North. </p>
<p>It is common for documentaries to establish the science behind climate change by interviewing “global” scientific experts who can speak to its impacts. Of the individuals who fit this description, 75 per cent of speakers were white men (predominantly American or British), while less than one per cent of non-local scientific experts interviewed in the films we examined were racialized women.</p>
<p>By contrast, 76 per cent of those portrayed in the films as “victims” of the negative effects of climate change were racialized people. This alone is not unexpected, since the <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780367814533-9/global-inequalities-climate-change-c%C3%A9line-guivarch-nicolas-taconet">effects of climate change are felt unequally</a>. </p>
<p>Black and Indigenous communities and people of colour have generally experienced the <a href="https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf">worst impacts</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/cse.2021.1125003">of climate change</a> in both the Global North and South. </p>
<p>However, the common pattern of contrasting racialized people who are affected with the almost exclusively white male “expert” <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5518-5_2">reinforces racial and gender hierarchies</a> of knowledge related to climate change. In this framing, white western experts are portrayed as those who understand climate change, while the solutions and knowledge of racialized groups are relegated to the margins. </p>
<h2>Geographical disparities in screen-time</h2>
<p>There is also a disparity in which regions are shown on screen and how they are portrayed in the climate change documentaries we analyzed.</p>
<p>Across the 10 films, North America received the most screen-time of any geographic region (19.5 per cent), followed by Asia (13.9 per cent) and Europe (7.2 per cent).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Bar graph shows North America received the most screen time across 10 documentaries studied." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427134/original/file-20211019-19-y2odey.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Differences in screen-time across geographic regions in 10 climate change documentaries.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Paige Bennett)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the films we examined, three regions were repeatedly portrayed as uniquely vulnerable to climate change: the African continent, polar regions and small island nations. Despite their vulnerability, these regions received far less screen-time than other regions in the films. </p>
<p>When these regions were discussed, the majority of this footage focused on climate change impacts or how climate refugees would affect the Global North. This differs from portrayals of countries such as the United States or China, which focused on climate change causes, impacts and proposed solutions within each country.</p>
<p>While vulnerable regions are experiencing the accelerated impacts of climate change, using the limited screen-time available in this way <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.351">reinforces</a> <a href="https://www.academia.edu/22813695/Imaginative_Geographies_of_Climate_Change_Induced_Displacements_and_Migrations_A_Case_Study_of_Tuvalu">existing</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2018.1532747">one-dimensional media stereotypes</a> and treats vulnerable regions as a means to the end of protecting the interests of wealthier countries.</p>
<h2>Social stereotypes, unbalanced geographic coverage</h2>
<p>Although the science of climate change is <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/">well-established</a>, the way filmmakers frame scientific knowledge for public consumption in climate change documentaries with a global focus often reinforces social stereotypes and unbalanced coverage of the geographic regions most affected.</p>
<p>Some of the films we analyzed do challenge those stereotypes. <a href="https://www.rocoeducational.com/this_changes_everything"><em>This Changes Everything</em></a> and <a href="http://www.howtoletgomovie.com/"><em>How to Let Go of the World and Love All the Things Climate Can’t Change</em></a> both include strong representation of Black, Indigenous and people of colour’s voices from around the world, while also being highly critical of the fossil fuel industry and inaction by western nations on climate change. Examples include featuring <a href="https://www.rocoeducational.com/this_changes_everything">solar power at the Northern Cheyenne reservation in <em>This Changes Everything</em></a>, and the intimate portrait of a leader within the <a href="https://world.350.org/pacificwarriors/">Pacific Climate Warriors’ fight</a> against Australian coal in <em>How to Let Go</em>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IpuSt_ST4_U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">‘This Changes Everything’ trailer.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Challenging stereotypes</h2>
<p>Our study focused on how documentaries on popular platforms with a global focus portrayed the climate crisis, which enabled us to compare representations of different geographic regions.</p>
<p>We also note that films with a more specific geographical focus that mobilize place-based knowledge can offer critical perspectives about climate change, and also push back against the imbalances and stereotypes we documented. One example is <a href="http://www.isuma.tv/inuit-knowledge-and-climate-change"><em>Qapirangajuq: Inuit Knowledge and Climate Change</em></a>, an Inuktitut documentary <a href="https://vtape.org/video?vi=7141">with English (or French)</a> subtitles co-directed by Inuk director Zacharias Kunuk. </p>
<p>This film, for example, provides a useful counterpoint to the popular climate change documentaries examined in our study, and suggests how Inuit, Indigenous or other local knowledges can contribute to our understanding of climate change.</p>
<p>As the world turns its attention to the media coverage of COP26 in Glasgow, it is important to consider whose voices we focus on, who is on the periphery and who has been removed from the frame entirely in media narratives of the climate crisis.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167181/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Reuben Rose-Redwood receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paige Bennett received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.</span></em></p>Many popular climate change documentaries rely on white male narrators and experts, reinforce social stereotypes and provide unbalanced coverage of the regions most affected.Reuben Rose-Redwood, Associate Dean Academic in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Professor of Geography, University of VictoriaPaige Bennett, Affiliated Member, Critical Geographies Research Collaboratory, University of VictoriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1552762021-03-10T17:32:11Z2021-03-10T17:32:11Z‘Blockadia’ helped cancel the Keystone XL pipeline — and could change mainstream environmentalism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388831/original/file-20210310-14-xe73jf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=251%2C99%2C3631%2C1757&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The direct confrontational tactics adopted by environmental activists over the past decade have transformed the global climate movement.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recent comment that Canada and the United States <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-meet-the-press-vaccines-saudi-arabia-keystone-1.5931364">will move forward after the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline project</a>, the public debate on the fate of Alberta’s troubled bitumen sector still burns. </p>
<p>Back on Jan. 20, U.S. President Joe Biden <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-protecting-public-health-and-environment-and-restoring-science-to-tackle-climate-crisis/">reversed the approval of the project</a>, fulfilling one of his election promises. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney called the decision a “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/27/alberta-leader-says-bidens-move-to-cancel-keystone-pipeline-a-gut-punch">gut punch</a>.”</p>
<p>For environmental groups, the cancellation of Keystone XL reset American climate policy that had been hit hard by the Trump administration. More crucially, it was a “<a href="https://350.org/press-release/biden-to-stop-keystone-xl/">people-powered victory</a>” following more than 10 years of grassroots action that drew on economic and legal means to stop the pipeline. </p>
<p>Their <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/climate-and-environment/environmental-groups-keep-fighting-kxl-despite-biden-s-promise-to-block-pipeline-1.5221397">sustained political pressure</a> was a notable contributing factor to Biden’s decision. Many members of the coalition against Keystone XL opted for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-015-9289-0">direct confrontational tactics, such as marches, mass arrests, lockdowns and blockades</a> that went beyond the strategies typically used by environmental groups. </p>
<p>Known as “blockadia,” these tactics have transformed the global climate movement in substantive ways — and it may surge once again after COVID-19 lockdowns are relaxed and lifted. </p>
<h2>The rise of blockadia</h2>
<p>Naomi Klein popularized the term “blockadia” in her book <a href="https://naomiklein.org/this-changes-everything/"><em>This Changes Everything</em></a>. She writes that blockadia is the “roving transnational conflict zone […] where ‘regular’ people […] are trying to stop this era of extreme extraction with their bodies or in the courts.” </p>
<p>Beginning with a series of small direct actions that put emphasis on social justice to the environmental movement, <a href="https://www.yesmagazine.org/environment/2013/01/12/welcome-to-blockadia-enbridge-transcanada-tar-sands/">Blockadia was a “web of campaigns” local activists launched against oilsands pipelines, including Keystone XL and the Northern Gateway</a> in the early 2010s. </p>
<p>At the time, other social movements such as <a href="https://www.yesmagazine.org/democracy/2013/01/11/idle-no-more-rises-to-defend-ancestral-lands-and-fight-climate-change-bill-mckibben/">Idle No More</a> were also using confrontational tactics to stop the flow of fossil fuels and disrupt the business-as-usual mode preferred by many big corporations. The movement established a new paradigm in mainstream North American environmentalism. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A large group of people gather in the snow holding the flags of Indigenous nations." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/388825/original/file-20210310-19-1qb4gxj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Military veterans and Indigenous elders stop for a ceremonial prayer during a march to a spot near the Dakota Access oil pipeline site in Cannon Ball, N.D., in December 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/David Goldman)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Conventional environmental campaigns are marked by eye-catching celebrity environmentalism, advocacy activities targeting law makers and “not in my backyard” movements motivated by local concerns. Although blockadia has incorporated these strategies, the spread and success of it indicates three major developments. </p>
<p>First, participants of blockadia think more in terms of <a href="https://eeb.org/blockadia-map-reveals-global-rise-of-anti-fossil-fuel-blockades/">what is legitimate than what is legal</a>. Consequently, confrontational tactics and civil disobedience actions are legitimized by an “us versus them” framing. Blockadia is mobilized by a sense of planetary emergency, further radicalizing environmentalism.</p>
<p>Second, blockadia strives to combine environmental and social justice concerns. This is arguably why movements under this umbrella term have led to the formation of unexpected political coalitions. Consider, for instance, the <a href="https://truthout.org/articles/cowboy-indian-solidarity-challenges-the-keystone-xl/">alliance of ranchers and Indigenous communities formed during the fight against Keystone XL</a>, as well as the solidarity with the Idle No More movement <a href="https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2015v40n4a2958">non-Indigenous peoples have expressed on social media</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fridaysforfuture-when-youth-push-the-environmental-movement-towards-climate-justice-115694">#Fridaysforfuture: When youth push the environmental movement towards climate justice</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Third, blockadia is decentralized. Despite outspoken activists like Naomi Klein and Bill McKibben, small local organizations brought together by shared environmental concerns drive the success of blockadia. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1105177">Social media</a> played a crucial role in coalition-building among these organizations. </p>
<p>In the case of transnational resistance to Keystone XL, organizations such as <a href="https://actionnetwork.org/groups/nokxl-promise-to-protect">the Promise to Protect coalition</a> are fighting together for globally minded local concerns. Their opposition is motivated by a range of things, from the threat of potential spills or the risk to local waterways, but they are all aware of the global implications of their local actions. In the words of environmental researcher <a href="https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/search/publication/8982818">Meike Vedder</a>, the rise of blockadia indicates a shift from “not in my backyard” to “not on my planet.” </p>
<h2>The future of environmental activism</h2>
<p>The collective efforts of diverse groups have not only contributed to the delays and cancellations of high-profile pipeline projects like Keystone XL and Northern Gateway, they have been growing around the globe as well. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/381818/original/file-20210201-13-1g0n3ld.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://theconversation.com/ca/podcasts">Click here to listen to Don’t Call Me Resilient</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://ejatlas.org/">The Environmental Justice Atlas project</a>, launched in 2015, has documented over 3,000 environmental conflicts around the globe. Many of them echo blockadia’s populist, pro-democractic push for fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition.” </p>
<p>Whether blockadia is able to fundamentally shift the dynamics of mainstream environmentalism remains uncertain. It will depend on the ability of blockadia-inspired actions to transform local concerns into broader quests for environmental and social justice. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-build-support-for-ambitious-climate-action-in-4-steps-155636">How to build support for ambitious climate action in 4 steps</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18922-7">temporarily decreased global carbon dioxide emissions</a> and prompted ongoing public conversations on “<a href="https://www.resilientrecovery.ca/">resilient recovery</a>.” Blockadia could bounce back when lockdown measures are lifted. </p>
<p>The key lesson offered by the Keystone XL cancellation to Canadian energy politics is: if policies won’t address populist demands for radical departure from subsidizing the oil and gas sector, the public anger on climate inaction will carry on. Although blockadia began as an anti-Keystone XL campaign, it is likely to continue to disrupt the established policy discussions on Canada’s commitment to taking action on climate change. </p>
<iframe height="200px" width="100%" frameborder="no" scrolling="no" seamless="" src="https://player.simplecast.com/65e610f9-842e-4091-b314-c985dc941f17?dark=true"></iframe>
<p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/dont-call-me-resilient/id1549798876"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/321534/original/file-20200319-22606-q84y3k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=182&fit=crop&dpr=1" alt="Listen on Apple Podcasts" width="268" height="68"></a>
<a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/37tK4zmjWvq2Sh6jLIpzp7"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/321535/original/file-20200319-22606-1l4copl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=183&fit=crop&dpr=1" width="268" height="70"></a></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155276/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sibo Chen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A web of local environmental action campaigns launched against oilsands pipelines a decade ago helped bring an end to Keystone XL.Sibo Chen, Assistant Professor, School of Professional Communication, Toronto Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/599082016-09-08T06:51:45Z2016-09-08T06:51:45ZThe limit of labels: ethical food is more than consumer choice<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136977/original/image-20160908-25266-c5yxk8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is 'voting with your wallet' an ethico-political act or an illusion?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Over the past hundred years, industrial agriculture and the globalised food system have produced cheaper, longer lasting and more diverse food items. We can now enjoy tropical fruits in winter, purchase whole chickens at the price of a cup of coffee, and eat fresh bread long after it was baked.</p>
<p>Once celebrated as the benevolent results of food science and ingenuity of farmers, these cheap and safe foods are dismissed by critics as the tainted fruits of “Big Food” – the culinary version of Big Tobacco and Big Oil. </p>
<p>Food is no longer simply a matter of taste or convenience. Our food choices have become ethical and political issues. </p>
<p>An innocuous but central strategy in these debates is the food label.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/136976/original/image-20160907-25253-ugm53k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1133&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">No Logo by Naomi Klein.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Picador</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In recent years there has been an explosion of <a href="https://www.academia.edu/2005503/Ethics_of_Food_-_Annotated_Bibliography">ethico-political food labels</a> to address concerns such as slavery, nutrition, environmental degradation, fair trade and animal cruelty. These disparate concerns are unified by their connection to the amorphous culprit “Big Food”.</p>
<p>The idea is that by knowing what is in our food and how it was produced, we will reject unethical food corporations, buy from ethical producers and thereby promote justice. </p>
<p>But is this necessarily so?</p>
<p>The power of truth to awaken the slumbering consumer giant has been in place since at least the mid-1990s. In the introduction to her landmark book, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/647.No_Logo">No Logo</a> (1999), Naomi Klein outlines her hypothesis:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>that as more people discover the brand-name secrets of the global logo web, their outrage will fuel the next big political movement, a vast wave of opposition squarely targeting transnational corporation, particularly those with very high name-brand recognition.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to Klein, when the veil is removed and people discover the “secrets” behind their consumer products, an outrage will be unleashed that will transform the global web of capital.</p>
<p>We see this logic in <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2016/06/02/4474344.htm">calls for food labels</a> to reveal unethical food production practices of Big Food. By giving consumers more information, it is believed they will use their buying power to force change. Perhaps.</p>
<h2>Limits of ethico-political consumption</h2>
<p>First, a danger of ethico-political consumption is that citizens are transformed into consumers, and political action is reduced to shopping. Rather than holding companies and governments to account for unethical practice, it becomes a matter of consumer choice.</p>
<p>For example, most of us would consider a proposal to use consumer choice as a way of resolving slavery in the American cotton industry during the 19th century to be a perverse idea. Slavery, we like to believe, should be outlawed. It is not an issue to be solved through consumer preference. Yet today we find ourselves in a <a href="http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/there-are-more-slaves-today-any-time-human-history">situation</a> where we are trying to solve issues of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2015/05/04/4227055.htm">slavery</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/mafia-uses-slave-labour-for-tinned-tomatoes-dumped-in-australia/news-story/b79f9796a3b4dbded54b7469a3d865d4">exploitation</a> through consumer choice.</p>
<p>Today, 45.8 million people are living in slavery. According to the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace-relations/andrew-forrest-puts-worlds-richest-countries-on-notice-global-slavery-index-20160526-gp4dlg.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn%3Atwi-13omn1677-edtrl-other%3Annn-17%2F02%2F2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o%26sa%3DD%26usg%3DALhdy28zsr6qiq">Global Slavery Index</a>, 4,300 are working in Australian food production or sex industries. Many more work in the global food system, of which Australia is a part. </p>
<p>As Nicola Frith has previously argued in The Conversation, the slavery used in the global food system that supplies prawns to UK and US supermarkets <a href="https://theconversation.com/slavery-is-a-crime-it-shouldnt-be-up-to-consumers-to-fight-it-28347">should not be considered an issue of consumer choice but a crime.</a> </p>
<p>A second problem with ethico-political consumption is that the consumer response is susceptible to co-option by the very corporations that are being protested. Due to the vast array of products sold by trans-national corporations, it is possible for corporations to maintain highly profitable but “unethical” products, along with less profitable but “ethical” products.</p>
<p>For example, Pace Farm is one of the largest producers of cage-eggs in Australia, yet they also sell <a href="http://www.pacefarm.com/index.php/our-products/fresh-eggs">free-range eggs</a>. They also have <a href="http://guide.ethical.org.au/guide/browse/guide/?type=25">other brands</a> that are not obviously associated with Pace Farm, like <a href="http://www.familyvaluefreerangeeggs.com.au/">Family Value</a>. </p>
<p>In 2013, Oxfam launched <a href="http://www.behindthebrands.org/en-us/about">Behind the Brands</a>. This campaign draws attention to the influence of multinational food corporations on the global food system and negative impacts on women, workers, farmers, land, water and climate. Although the campaign uses a variety of strategies to critique these corporations, much of the focus falls on consumers. </p>
<p>A popular image associated with the campaign shows the way hundreds of popular food brands are actually owned by ten corporations. It’s worth noting this chart is several years old and some of the listed brands have changed hands, but its point remains. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/132278/original/image-20160728-21591-35froi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The illusion of choice. CLICK TO ENLARGE.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Oxfam/Behind the Brand</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The image has been repeatedly shared on social media and is commonly accompanied with the text “the illusion of choice”. However, clearly there is choice here – there are hundreds of brands, each with thousands of products. Of course, the sentiment of the “illusion of choice” statement isn’t simply that we have only a single choice of soft drink or cereal, but that all choices lead to one of ten transnational corporations.</p>
<p>The more troubling illusion, however, is not that the thousands of products lining the supermarket shelves are owned by ten corporations, but that political consumption – the proverbial “voting with your wallet” – is illusory.</p>
<p>The illusion of consumer food choice as an ethico-political act is not the pernicious creation of food corporations, but co-creation of public health experts, consumer advocates, governments, food ethicists and a host of others.</p>
<p>Even if these labels serve to disrupt corporate brands, they also trap individuals into responsibility for systemic and global issues, such as public health, global poverty, animal welfare or fair working conditions. This isn’t to say we are absolved, but the idea that more consumption will solve the problems of consumption is self-defeating.</p>
<p>Using labels or apps to draw attention to the political and ethical features of consumer choice is a fine objective, but largely symbolic. If certain activities of food corporations and the global food system are considered unethical, then a plurality of approaches is needed – one of which needs to be international and domestic legislation. </p>
<p>As the American economist <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Supercapitalism.html?id=IPmWgoKQTgUC">Robert Reich</a> argues, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Companies are not interested in the public good. It is not their responsibility to be good…if we want them to play differently, we have to change the rules.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>For the past decade, there has been an over-reliance on self-regulation and naïve expectations about corporate social responsibility. This needs to change, and not by simply adding a new label to our food.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59908/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Mayes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Food labels aren’t just nutritional information anymore: they’re moral statements about everything from fair trade to palm oil. But let’s not confuse shopping with effective political action.Christopher Mayes, Post-Doctoral Fellow in Bioethics, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/516082015-12-04T10:31:09Z2015-12-04T10:31:09ZNaomi Klein’s ‘Leap Manifesto’: we can’t rely on big business for a climate fix<p>Discussions at the Paris climate talks take place within incredibly narrow parameters. In fact, it would not be too great an exaggeration to say that the summit’s main purpose is to send the private sector a message about which way it should steer its future investments.</p>
<p>The financial press tends to be the most explicit on this point. The Financial Times, for instance, <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/8b2ad396-8c62-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3t3jdUhdQ">described</a> the purpose of the Paris summit like this: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Investors will need to be persuaded that governments are going to make it easier for them to make money from a new electric bus system or a wind farm rather than a highway or a coal power plant.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I am under no illusion about the scale of business investment required to help developing countries move to low-carbon energy sources. </p>
<p>But by narrowing the conversation to neoliberal, market-based solutions, we risk ignoring other opportunities for social and environmental change. This is particularly true under the current <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-state-of-emergency-could-thwart-public-demonstrations-at-the-paris-climate-talks-50841">state of emergency</a> in France, which has silenced alternative or opposing voices.</p>
<p>These concerns are shared by the Canadian author and activist Naomi Klein, who this week (alongside her compatriots, the film-maker Avi Lewis and author Maude Barlow) came to Paris to present her <a href="https://leapmanifesto.org/en/the-leap-manifesto/">Leap Manifesto</a> – featuring strategies for a just transition away from fossil fuels.</p>
<p>Lewis opened proceedings by noting, “there is a huge gap between what we are offered by political leaders and what we are ready for in terms of bold and radical change”, before Klein added:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I refuse to leave our future in the hands of world leaders cloistered in Le Bourget [the location of the climate conference]. People are ready to leap and lead. We need politicians who are ready to listen and follow.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>The Manifesto</h2>
<p>Klein described the manifesto as a “nuts-and-bolts policy document” that seeks to bring together diverse movements to fight for a “justice-based transition away from fossil fuels”. The document itself is an example of this approach, having been drafted by 60 representatives from Canada’s indigenous nations, faith groups, environmental groups and the labour movement. </p>
<p>It contains several substantive ideas, including respecting indigenous rights, giving the public control of energy systems, funding clean transport, ending fossil fuel subsidies, and scrapping laws that prevent attempts to rebuild local economies and stop damaging extractive projects. </p>
<p>With respect to the energy transition, Klein underlined the importance of programs that empower first nations communities to own and control local initiatives. Citing positive examples from Alberta’s tar sands region, she argued that transition can be a “concrete way to fight climate change while addressing historical wrongs”.</p>
<p>Canada’s newspaper of record, The Globe and Mail, described the ideas as “<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/leap-manifesto-gets-poor-marks-for-timing-and-content-otherwise-fine/article26373885/">madness</a>”, although at the time of writing the manifesto has attracted more than 31,000 pledges of support, not to mention being well supported by <a href="http://biology.mcgill.ca/unesco/EN_Fullreport.pdf">scientific evidence</a>. </p>
<p>But at her presentation, Klein took issue with the idea that climate justice is a fantasy to be derided by hard-headed realists, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This has things in reverse. Doing everything we can to reduce emissions is hard-headed realism. Doing nothing is fantasy.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Is 2016 the ‘leap’ year?</h2>
<p>While the manifesto makes concrete policy demands, it should also be viewed as an example that seeks to inspire communities around the world to develop their own statements that address their own circumstances.</p>
<p>This is important, because it has meant that groups of people have organised and worked cooperatively to identify tangible solutions to their specific problems. Those people have ownership of the manifesto and a particular understanding of its meaning that matches their own unique history and geography. They also have practice in building networks of solidarity and participating in a positive project that is not simply responding to a crisis. </p>
<p>Klein is aiming to brand February 29, 2016 as “International Leap Day”, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Leap years are a great metaphor because we change our human system in deference to the Earth’s revolution around the Sun … It shows that it’s easier to adjust human-created laws than it is to change the laws of nature.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>We do not need to leave solutions to politicians who have already shown their lack of ambition about reducing emissions, nor to the <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/43986518-9426-11e5-b190-291e94b77c8f.html#axzz3t3jdUhdQ">greenwashed</a> sponsors of the Paris summit. We also do not have time for small, incremental steps towards fixing the climate. </p>
<p>Rather, as Klein argued “we are living in a historic moment that demands audacity and vision … it’s time to turn the world right side up, its time to leap”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51608/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Burdon is affiliated with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. </span></em></p>Naomi Klein has told the sidelines of the Paris climate talks that real climate action can’t be delivered without social justice too.Peter Burdon, Senior lecturer, Adelaide Law School, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/470392015-09-21T04:04:24Z2015-09-21T04:04:24ZTwo visions of the ‘new economy’ collide where people and technology intersect<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/95310/original/image-20150918-12343-1emeet8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=250%2C12%2C3787%2C2561&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">WikiHouse is one example of the technology-driven new economy, which focuses on people rather than profits.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">WikiHouse</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In Sydney in September, <a href="http://www.naomiklein.org/main">Naomi Klein</a> spoke passionately about how climate change opens up opportunities to <a href="http://fodi.sydneyoperahouse.com/program/capitalism-and-the-climate/">change our economic system</a> in a fundamental way, focusing it more on “people and planet” than on economic growth. </p>
<p>Her view is similar to that of the <a href="http://www.neweconomics.org/pages/what-we-do">New Economics Foundation</a> in the UK and to the <a href="http://neweconomy.net/about/necs-mission-and-vision">New Economy Coalition</a> in the US. These link systemic economic change to democratic empowerment, grass-roots struggle and the pursuit of environmental and social justice. </p>
<p>This is one emerging vision of a “new economy”. </p>
<p>Another vision is <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/17/postcapitalism-end-of-capitalism-begun">technology-led</a>, increasingly centred on digital disruptors, such as peer-to-peer services like <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/airbnb">AirBnB</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/uber">Uber</a>. </p>
<p>The technology-led vision is linked to the increasing dominance of a service-based economy, as well as technological shifts to manufacturing processes that intensify competitive dynamics and global mobility. </p>
<p>Both visions have long histories, but there are fascinating possibilities emerging at their intersection, drawing on elements of both visions, designing social and ecological values into the heart of technological platforms. </p>
<p>Some of the best examples of this lie in the domain of web-enabled peer-to-peer services. These services use technology to eliminate many of the intermediaries and “middlemen” that have typified service provision in industrialised economies, particularly in food, transport and energy. </p>
<h2>Helping people access food and housing</h2>
<p>Two interesting examples of smaller-scale experiments that blur the boundaries between the two versions of the new economy are the Open Food Network and Wikihouse. </p>
<p><a href="http://openfoodnetwork.org/">Open Food Network</a> (to whose crowdfunding campaign I have contributed) uses open source software to link producers and consumers of local ethical food. Based in Melbourne, it describes itself as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>An emerging networked e-commerce system for activating online food marketplaces and collaborative distribution … [enabling] farmers, eaters and independent food enterprises to connect, trade, manage Food Hubs and coordinate logistics.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://wikihouse.cc">Wikihouse</a> uses free and open source hardware designs to enable rapid build of eco-housing. Founded in the UK by architect and designer Alastair Parvin, it describes itself as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A small non-profit with a huge mission: to create the world’s simplest, most sustainable building systems, which are shared in commons – owned by and for everyone.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These are systems Wikihouse claims make it possible for a team of amateurs to assemble the chassis of a mid-sized house in one to three days. Wikihouse is already being deployed to good effect in <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/small-business/67617829/WikiHouse-project-a-social-enterprise">Christchurch</a> in the wake of the 2011 earthquake. </p>
<p>In many ways, both Open Food Network and Wikihouse could stand as an example of either version of the new economy. Both provide a web-based platform that cuts out or curtails the power of the middleman. Both stress the desire to create positive social change of a systemic kind, one that will disrupt the existing dominance of large-scale commercial provision of food or housing. These features echo the technology-led perspective on the new economy.</p>
<p>But “people and planet” are also designed into both projects. This is visible in their strong commitment to open-source and the way this supports small community groups anywhere in the world in setting up local initiatives easily and at low cost. </p>
<p>Similarly, both stress the inbuilt sociality and affordability of the practices they enable as the key to allowing broad take-up and scaling by replication (rather than scaling up). They seek to go beyond simply providing a software platform as a commercial service, aiming to connect like-minded groups around the world in a collaborative community. </p>
<h2>Debating the details</h2>
<p>Are these nascent multinational chains-in-waiting? Many less obvious and visible dimensions of the projects suggest not, such as not-for-profit legal structures as the umbrella entity for the projects, open-source intellectual property, an <a href="http://www.wikihouse.cc/support/">explicit avoidance</a> of venture capital investment. All these combine to create a <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Food,_Sharing_Economies_and_the_Ethos_of_Legal_Infrastructure">distinctive ethos</a> that resists being categorised as either/or of the two visions of a new economy. </p>
<p>The New Zealand chapter of Wikihouse, initially called Think Radical, tells its <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/small-business/67617829/WikiHouse-project-a-social-enterprise">own story</a> in slightly wry terms as one where it was “advised to formalise a company structure in the interests of credibility and trust”, at which point “it was suggested that Think Radical would be, well, too radical”. They named themselves Space Craft Systems instead. This move epitomises the sometimes uncomfortable straddling act that these projects embody. </p>
<p>The key point here is not to suggest that these projects are win-win solutions. On the contrary, it is more to insist that the political and ethical challenges that are put front and centre by social commentators such as Naomi Klein are equally integral to any technology-led vision of a new economy. </p>
<p>Debating not only the details that make these initiatives work in practice, but also their political and ethical implications, can help us to understand better the possibilities of the new economy. It will also remind us of the multiple ways in which peer-to-peer and sharing economies might transform the economic landscape ahead.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47039/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bronwen Morgan receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She has contributed to the crowdfunding campaign of Open Food Network. </span></em></p>Two visions of the ‘new economy’, one based on environmental and social justice values, the other on disruptive technologies, are coming together to challenge the status quo.Bronwen Morgan, Professor of Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/470372015-09-03T20:09:13Z2015-09-03T20:09:13ZSpeaking with: Naomi Klein on capitalism and climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93738/original/image-20150903-24488-1ax6mp5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=21%2C24%2C2014%2C1434&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Noami Klein speaking in Sydney.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Christopher Wright</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In her latest book, <a href="https://theconversation.com/book-review-naomi-klein-finds-kernels-of-hope-amid-climate-change-and-untamed-capitalism-31756">This Changes Everything</a> (2014), the Canadian writer and activist Naomi Klein tackles the issue of climate change through a familiar prism: capitalism.</p>
<p>She argues that unrestrained capitalism is the root of the problem and that the global response to climate change has, thus far, been shaped by wealth and power.</p>
<p>Christopher Wright spoke to Naomi Klein on the eve of her appearance at the Sydney <a href="http://fodi.sydneyoperahouse.com/program/capitalism-and-the-climate/">Festival of Dangerous Ideas</a> about the impact of capitalism on the climate, and how grassroots movements – not market-based approaches – hold the key to tackling the all-pervading problem of climate change.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/speaking-with.../id934267338">Subscribe</a> to The Conversation’s Speaking With podcasts on iTunes, or <a href="http://tunein.com/radio/Speaking-with---The-Conversation-Podcast-p671452/">follow</a> on Tunein Radio.</em></p>
<p>Music: Free Music Archive/<a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Broke_For_Free/">Broke For Free</a></p>
<p>Additional audio:
AFP, NBC News, ABC News</p>
<p>
<section class="inline-content">
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275743/original/file-20190521-23817-1fnbziu.png?w=128&h=128">
<div>
<header></header>
<p><a href="http://aom.org/">Christopher Wright is a member of the Academy of Management</a></p>
<footer>The academy is a funding partner of The Conversation US.</footer>
</div>
</section>
</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47037/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Wright has received funding from the Australian Research Council. Christopher Wright is an Academy of Management scholar.</span></em></p>Christopher Wright speaks with Canadian journalist, author and activist Naomi Klein about capitalism's impact on the environment and how it has influenced our responses to climate change.Christopher Wright, Professor of Organisational Studies, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/468002015-08-31T04:13:51Z2015-08-31T04:13:51ZHow do we ‘change everything’ as Naomi Klein suggests? Let’s start by getting ‘adversaries’ to listen to one another<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93409/original/image-20150831-29517-hitsc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1387%2C570%2C1576%2C889&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's easy to get overwhelmed by the size of the problem.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paintings/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The author and activist Naomi Klein is currently on an Australian <a href="http://thischangeseverything.org/events/">book tour</a>, bringing us the terrifying message that climate change “changes everything”. I say terrifying because, if you follow Klein’s logic to its conclusion, the only way to stop climate change is literally to change everything: our cities, economies, energy systems and patterns of consumption.</p>
<p>Klein’s argument is that climate change threatens every dimension of our life on Earth – the result of an abusive relationship between people and planet, made possible by a voracious hyper-capitalist economy. Fixing climate change means changing how that economy works at its core. </p>
<p>That may seem a rather all-encompassing observation, but the persuasiveness of her argument comes from the insight that climate change isn’t just another “issue” on a shopping list of social problems. It’s an epidemic whose cure offers an opportunity to turn around myriad injustices perpetrated in the name of the economy. </p>
<p>But if climate change is connected to “everything”, how do we get “everyone” together to change it?</p>
<h2>Worldwide local action</h2>
<p>There isn’t one single approach, of course. Klein is careful to argue that a new world will only be possible if thousands of grassroots movements bloom across the globe.</p>
<p>But one aspect of her argument deserves more attention. How do you foster coordination and collaboration, both across geographical boundaries and between traditional adversaries?</p>
<p>Collaborations can create tension, and battles over competing interests often see good intentions fail. We are used to the familiar tension of “jobs versus the environment”, for instance. There are also difficulties in balancing the need to coordinate campaigns nationally (or globally) while still ensuring that local communities feel that their efforts are meaningful.</p>
<p>The answer to better collaboration is to build effective alliances and coalitions based on mutual interests and values, not just single issues and events. </p>
<p>But being good at campaigning and being good at coalitions are not necessarily the same skill. Campaigns require fast action, a clear strategy and a smorgasbord of tactics. Coalitions between people who haven’t worked together, or between national and local players, require trust. </p>
<p>Trust takes time. Time to break down the stereotypes (“blokey” unionists, “demure” Christians, “hippy” environmentalists) and time to discover where the common ground may lie.</p>
<h2>Forging new bonds</h2>
<p>It’s no surprise that the most successful and creative climate action, both in Australia and among the examples in Klein’s book, have come from regional areas. <a href="http://www.lockthegate.org.au/">Lock the Gate</a> and <a href="https://fightforthereef.org.au/">Fight for the Reef</a> both emerged from local rural communities. </p>
<p>Sure, every community has its share of tensions and regional Australia is no exception – as shown by encounters between loggers and greenies, or farmers and indigenous leaders. But these regional communities also have relationships that are stronger than in cities. They are places where more people know each other by name, and where saving the place where they live (whether we’re talking about farmland or the Great Barrier Reef) is a tangible unifier – literally and figuratively common ground.</p>
<p>So what will it take to bring these kinds of unusual alliances to our cities? At the moment, factors like anonymity, busy lifestyles, and professional cliques all hamper the building of trusting relationships across different groups.</p>
<p>In his <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/papal-encyclical">recent encyclical</a>, Pope Francis interpreted climate change as an invitation for us not only to renew the relationship between people and planet, but to reimagine our relationship with each other.</p>
<p>So while we work to end our utilitarian relationship with the planet, powerful climate action can only be built if we follow that example and see each other and each other’s organisational leaders as whole beings, with a full range of dreams, aspirations and motivations.</p>
<p>Building a broad movement will challenge those who are currently inside or outside the climate movement in different ways. For those “outside”, it will mean recognising that the welfare of the planet is all of our issue, and making space for thinking about how climate affects every issue we face. </p>
<p>For those “inside”, building a diverse movement means letting go of some control. If we are to stop climate change, no one group can “own” the issue – including the “greenies”. It will be much easier with everyone on board, after all.</p>
<p>New groups and constituencies that embrace the challenge of climate change need to feel like it can be their space too. It won’t work if people are made to feel they need to become a “lefty” to care about the planet.</p>
<h2>First understand, then act</h2>
<p>One tip for building a diverse movement is learning the art of the “relational meeting”, where people take the time to understand what makes each other tick. Coalitions that use community organising, like the <a href="http://www.sydneyalliance.org.au/">Sydney Alliance</a> (of which I am the founding director), tend to train their leaders to build relationships <em>before</em> working on issues. As a consequence, they have cultivated relationships between traditional strangers – from the <a href="https://www.catholic.org.au/">Catholic Church</a> to the <a href="http://www.cancer.org.au/">Cancer Council</a>, and from the <a href="http://www.arabcouncil.org.au/">Arab Council</a> to the <a href="http://www.nswnma.asn.au/">nurses’ union</a>. </p>
<p>Another ingredient that makes diverse relationships work are “bridge-builders” – the translators and diplomats who can speak many activist languages, like those who are fluent in both “climate” and “union”, say, or “church” and “neighbourhood group”.</p>
<p>Yet another is the habit of letting the relationships lead groups to the solution rather than presenting people with fully formed prescriptions for action. We all know we need to work together across the planet to stop climate change, but we also need to respect everyone as capable actors in the process – including those who live in vastly different places or think in very different ways.</p>
<p>For instance, Lock the Gate has worked because local people have led and directed the strategy for <a href="http://www.lockthegate.org.au/ban_on_maules_creek_spring_clearing_vindicates_community_concerns">opposing land clearing at the Maules Creek mine</a>, and national climate campaigners supported their lead. If national groups had tried to dictate the strategy, the movement might have fractured. </p>
<p>This is the “walk and chew gum” manoeuvre that the 21st-century climate movement needs to master: building new relationships while still mobilising the old. It has to be an open-minded, open-hearted journey in which all are open to learning and change. </p>
<p>If we need to “change everything”, let’s hope that includes ourselves. Let’s reimagine how we work, what strategies we use, and what we fight for as we work together to save our common home.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/46800/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amanda Tattersall is affiliated with Sydney Alliance and GetUp.org.au.</span></em></p>Climate change ‘changes everything’, says the writer Naomi Klein. The only way society can respond is to change itself - and that will need everyone on be on the same page instead of arguing about it.Amanda Tattersall, Honorary Associate, Department of Geography, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/395722015-03-31T06:26:11Z2015-03-31T06:26:11ZIs capitalism killing us?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/76548/original/image-20150331-1277-rw2i6s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Gabrielle Brassard-Lecours</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Modern life is full of ironies, paradoxes and what Marxists used to call “contradictions”. Perhaps the greatest contradiction of all time is the possibility that the capitalist system is not only incompatible with a sustainable natural environment, but that it is also placing a rather large question mark over our collective future on the planet. </p>
<p>While this may come not come as a revelation to the surprisingly large number of Marxist scholars working on environmental issues, it ought to be the proverbial wake-up call for the rest of us. Until recently, however, it looked like a message that few would actually hear, much less heed. Marxists haven’t really had a bestseller since the Communist Manifesto, and Karl himself isn’t too popular with the younger set – his trend-setting facial hair notwithstanding.</p>
<p>Naomi Klein, by contrast, is someone who does have recognition and credibility in the eyes of a youthful audience. Her latest book, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs the Climate, is consequently likely to be far more widely read than anything produced by the Marxists who have been making similar arguments for years. Whether she will have any more luck in convincing people of the idea that “our economic system and our planetary system are now at war” is debatable.</p>
<p>Having read some of the leading Marxist writers on this topic I was not as astounded by some of Klein’s claims as the luminaries who provided endorsements for her book apparently were. I was, however, more acutely conscious of my own contradictory and unsustainable position than usual: I read the book on a return flight to Brisbane.</p>
<p>Clearly, if we have to rely on the likes of me to save the planet, we’re in trouble. I do more than my fair share of gadding about and I’m unlikely to stop as I make the entirely rational calculation that there’s no point in my doing otherwise and radically changing my behaviour unless everyone else does. And you’re not going to either, are you?</p>
<p>This is the essence of the problem we all face, of course, and the justification for the do-nothing approach of many governments around the world. While our own choices make eminent sense to us as individuals, they are a disaster when added together. </p>
<p>I’m a great admirer of Klein’s willingness to address the most important and difficult of questions, but her answers are disappointingly unconvincing. What we need, she argues, is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… an entirely new economic model and a new way of sharing this planet. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>She may well be right; in fact, I’m sure she is. But the question, as ever, is how do we get from where we are now to where we want to be? This assumes that we know who “we” are, and “they” don’t try to stop us, of course. Klein’s answer to this conundrum is that “any credible source of hope will have to come from below”. </p>
<p>Like so many others, she has essentially given up on the political and especially the economic elites who refuse to take our seemingly inescapable fate seriously. She argues that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The failure of our political leaders to even attempt to ensure a safe future for us represents a crisis of legitimacy of almost unfathomable proportions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>She may well be right about that, too, but it’s not obvious what a different political system looks like.</p>
<p>Likewise it’s not clear what the alternative to capitalism is, or even whether that capitalism is unambiguously the principal cause of our environmental woes. As Klein acknowledges – but doesn’t really explore in any detail – “socialism” as practised by China and the Soviet Union, at least, was synonymous with the ravaging of nature and environmental degradation on an epic scale. </p>
<p>The most fundamental and unaddressed question in this book and wider environmental debates more generally is about the carrying capacity of the planet – especially when populated by people <a href="https://theconversation.com/standing-room-only-32737">like me</a>. </p>
<p>In my defence, I haven’t added to the planet’s burdens by actually reproducing myself. Klein has, and I wonder how much of a difference this has made to her worldview. I’m guessing that if you’ve got kids you might feel an obligation to be positive and optimistic about the future no matter how compelling the evidence to the contrary may be.</p>
<p>For what it’s worth my dispiriting guess is that the incentive structures associated with capitalism and the fact that its principal beneficiaries are generally also the most politically powerful people on the planet means that sustained efforts at climate mitigation will be extremely difficult. Such efforts may come too late – if they come at all. </p>
<p>When the likes of the <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/">Koch brothers</a> in the US cease to be politically powerful and influential figures in the climate change debate, then perhaps I’ll begin to think differently.</p>
<p>I hope Klein’s optimism is justified, just as I hope to be talked out of my pessimism. In the meantime I shall continue to try and convince students that change is both possible and that they can play a key role in bringing it about – even if it means indulging in a little self-censorship to do so. </p>
<p>That’s another of life’s contradictions and paradoxes: the truth – if that’s what it is – really has become a bit too inconvenient for words.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/39572/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Modern life is full of ironies, paradoxes and what Marxists used to call “contradictions”. Perhaps the greatest contradiction of all time is the possibility that the capitalist system is not only incompatible…Mark Beeson, Professor of International Politics, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/389932015-03-20T03:40:02Z2015-03-20T03:40:02ZCan the Gates Foundation be convinced to dump fossil fuels?<p>This week, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/mar/16/keep-it-in-the-ground-guardian-climate-change-campaign">The Guardian newspaper</a>
has campaigned for the <a href="http://www.gatesfoundation.org/">Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation</a> to divest its fossil fuel investments – which the newspaper claims are worth <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/19/gates-foundation-has-14bn-in-fossil-fuels-investments-guardian-analysis">US$1.4 billion</a>.</p>
<p>The foundation can and should address the climate crisis, particularly given the threat it poses to food security, public health, human rights, and the development agenda.</p>
<h2>Practical responses</h2>
<p>The Gates Foundation has made a significant contribution to practical responses to poverty, and Bill Gates has been <a href="http://books.simonandschuster.com/Creative-Capitalism/Michael-Kinsley/9781416599425">a long-standing advocate of “creative capitalism” to address global development issues</a>. </p>
<p>To their credit, Bill and Melinda Gates have shown great personal engagement with larger questions about human development, and their foundation has been a significant actor in the fields of agriculture, global health, education, and population. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75323/original/image-20150319-1604-mdzisl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bill Gates during a 2013 speech on climate change.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matthew Rimmer</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet it has also been <a href="http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/General-Information/Foundation-FAQ">reluctant to address the climate question directly</a>, stating:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The foundation believes that climate change is a major issue facing all of us, particularly poor people in developing countries, and we applaud the work that others are doing to help find solutions in this area,</p>
</blockquote>
<p>and:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>While we do not fund efforts specifically aimed at reducing carbon emissions, many of our global health and development grants directly address problems that climate change creates or exacerbates.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/75324/original/image-20150319-1588-15z5r32.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sign on climate change at the Gates Foundation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matthew Rimmer</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For instance, the foundation highlights its agricultural development initiative, which it says will “help small farmers who live on less than $1 per day adapt to increased drought and flooding through the development of drought and flood resistant crops, improved irrigation efficiency, and other means”.</p>
<p>While this certainly involves indirectly responding to climate change, it doesn’t put the issue of preventing climate change at the heart of the issue.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/02/18/3623344/bill-gates-climate-change/">his annual letter</a>, Bill Gates noted: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is fair to ask whether the progress we’re predicting will be stifled by climate change… The most dramatic problems caused by climate change are more than 15 years away, but the long-term threat is so serious that the world needs to move much more aggressively — right now — to develop energy sources that are cheaper, can deliver on demand, and emit zero carbon dioxide.“ </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a somewhat curious statement, given the real and present danger already posed to food security, biodiversity, public health, and human security.</p>
<h2>The energy question</h2>
<p>Bill Gates has another keen interest: energy security. He has discussed what he sees as the need for <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-miracle-seeker-20101028#ixzz3UndixUlw">an "energy miracle”</a> to remedy the climate: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>To have the kind of reliable energy we expect, and to have it be cheaper and zero carbon, we need to pursue every available path to achieve a really big breakthrough. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>He seems to have been interested in nuclear power, carbon capture, and geo-engineering - rather than renewable energy.</p>
<p>For her part, Melinda Gates has <a href="http://www.aol.com/video/melinda-gates-to-climate-change-deniers-listen-to-the-science/518614047/">been highly critical of climate deniers</a>, emphasising the need for politicians to heed climate science.</p>
<h2>The Naomi Klein factor</h2>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DVgwmO8RYX0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This Changes Everything - Naomi Klein.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/174143/time-big-green-go-fossil-free#">2013 article in the Nation</a>, the writer Naomi Klein expressed concerns about the huge fossil fuel holdings of some charities, including the Gates Foundation, and argued that this was inconsistent with public health goals: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>A top priority of the Gates Foundation has been supporting malaria research, a disease intimately linked to climate… Does it really make sense to fight malaria while fueling one of the reasons it may be spreading more ferociously in some areas?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In her 2014 book, <a href="http://thischangeseverything.org/">This Changes Everything</a>, she went on to criticise the efforts of green billionaires to save us from climate change. Of Bill Gates and his foundation, she wrote: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Though he professes great concern about climate change, the Gates Foundation had at least $1.2 billion invested in just two oil giants, BP and ExxonMobil, as of December 2013, and those are only the beginning of his fossil fuel holdings.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Gates has been directly questioned on this issue, both in an <a href="https://vimeo.com/112980156">interview with a Dutch journalist</a> and during <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3761763.htm">a 2013 appearance on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Q&A program</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Edhd9WIIpmY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Bill Gates on ABC’s Q&A.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Klein has also criticised Bill Gates’ technocratic approach to the climate crisis, considering him to be overly dismissive of renewable energy: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>When Gates had his climate change epiphany, he too immediately raced to the prospect of a silver-bullet techno-fix in the future - without pausing to consider viable - if economically challenging - responses in the here and now.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Will The Guardian’s campaign succeed?</h2>
<p>The Guardian’s editor Alan Rusbridger has pledged to put <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/06/climate-change-guardian-threat-to-earth-alan-rusbridger">climate change at the “front and centre” of the newspaper’s coverage</a>, lending support to the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/15/climate-change-un-backs-divestment-campaign-paris-summit-fossil-fuels">global divestment movement</a> and urging philanthropic trusts like the Gates Foundation and Britain’s <a href="http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/">Wellcome Trust</a> to follow the example of the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/us/heirs-to-an-oil-fortune-join-the-divestment-drive.html?_r=0">Rockefeller Brothers Fund</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/M9MayBUgSHI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Keep It In The Ground - The Guardian.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Guardian said it recognised that the Gates Foundation has made “a huge contribution to human progress and equality by supporting scientific research and development projects”, but warned that “investments in fossil fuels are putting this progress at great risk, by undermining your long term ambitions.” </p>
<p>The campaign urges the Gates Foundation “to commit now to divesting from the top 200 fossil fuel companies within five years and to immediately freeze any new investments in those companies”. Rusbridger <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/16/argument-divesting-fossil-fuels-overwhelming-climate-change">wrote</a> that this would be “a small but crucial step in the economic transition away from a global economy run on fossil fuels”.</p>
<p>Hopefully, the campaign will be successful. Bill and Melinda Gates have certainly shown a willingness in the past to revise their approach, in light of new evidence, and both have been disturbed by the politics of climate denial. </p>
<p>The Gates Foundation can make a stronger contribution to the battle against climate change, especially given how the climate issue cuts across its food security, public health, and human rights aims. This is one way it can do so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38993/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Matthew Rimmer is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow, working on Intellectual Property and Climate Change. He is an associate professor at the ANU College of Law, and an associate director of the Australian Centre for Intellectual Property. Matthew Rimmer is currently an Australian Research Council Future Fellow working on a project entitled "Intellectual Property and Climate Change: Inventing Clean Technologes".</span></em></p>The Gates Foundation is being urged to dump its sizeable fossil fuel assets. Bill Gates cares deeply about world health and development, both of which are affected by climate, but will his charity divest?Matthew Rimmer, ARC Future Fellow and Associate Professor in Intellectual Property, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/320722014-10-06T01:54:39Z2014-10-06T01:54:39ZNaomi Klein or Al Gore? Making sense of contrasting views on climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60689/original/xcqjt8f4-1412294757.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">For Klein, it's all about mobilising the grassroots. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://flic.kr/p/p3KtHm">Stephen Melkisethian</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Earth is “fucked” and our insatiable growth economy is to blame. So argues Naomi Klein in her intentionally provocative best-seller <a href="http://thischangeseverything.org/">This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate</a>.</p>
<p>Klein is the latest among an influential network of like-minded authors who have declared that modern society is at war with nature in a battle that threatens the survivial of the human species. Examples include US writer/activist <a href="http://www.billmckibben.com/bio.html">Bill McKibben</a>, Canadian broadcaster <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/david/">David Suzuki</a>, and Australian philosopher <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/clive-hamilton-195">Clive Hamilton</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60791/original/b8wtn9jz-1412351060.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Klein: To fight climate change, we have to end capitalism.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Naomi_Klein_Warsaw_Nov.20_2008_Fot_Mariusz_Kubik_12.jpg">Mariusz Kubik</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Deeply skeptical of technological and market-based approaches to climate change, they urge the need for a new consciousness spread through grassroots organizing and protest. “Only mass movements can save us now,” Klein writes. She argues that “profound and radical economic transformation” is needed to avoid certain catastrophe. </p>
<p>The more than 300,000 people who turned out for last month’s <a href="http://qz.com/269303/watch-this-drone-capture-the-enormity-of-the-peoples-climate-march/">People’s Climate March</a> in New York are just the start. </p>
<p>For Klein, human survival demands that we engage in a furious battle against the status quo, one equal in intensity to the efforts that ended slavery and European colonialism. “Both these transformative movements forced ruling elites to relinquish practices that were still extraordinarily profitable, much as fossil fuel extraction is today,” she writes. </p>
<p>An abolitionist-style climate movement would allow a global alliance of left-wing activists to achieve a diverse range of social justice goals, argues Klein. These include repealing free trade agreements, easing immigration rules, establishing indigenous rights, and guaranteeing a minimum income level.</p>
<p>Ultimately, for Klein, climate change is our best chance to right the “festering wrongs” of colonialism and slavery, “the unfinished business of liberation.”</p>
<p>As a public intellectual and aspiring movement leader, Klein sees her mission as winning a “battle of cultural worldviews,” opening up the space for a “full throated debate about values,” telling new stories to “replace the ones that have failed us.”</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=902&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60684/original/kwb6j54n-1412270799.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1134&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bill McKibben’s views align with Klein’s.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_McKibben#mediaviewer/File:Bill_McKibben_at_RIT-3.jpg">Hotshot977</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In these new stories, Klein and her intellectual confederates value solutions that they see as coming from the natural world. They eschew technologies such as nuclear power or genetic engineering, arguing on behalf of a transition to smaller scale, locally controlled solar, wind, and geothermal energy technologies and organic farming. </p>
<p>In this egalitarian future where people grow their own food, produce their own energy, share jobs working 3-4 days/week, and deliberate in small groups, traditional definitions of economic growth would cease, with progress defined instead in terms of health, happiness, and community. </p>
<p>Ultimately, the hoped-for grand bargain on climate change will be that as rich nations “de-grow” their economies, they will share their surplus wealth and renewable technologies with China, India and other developing countries. In return these countries will choose a different, less consumer-driven path.</p>
<h2>Public intellectuals, disruptive ideas</h2>
<p>In a <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/wcc.317">paper just published</a> at Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change, I analyze how public intellectuals such as Klein and McKibben shape debate over climate change. I compare their arguments to other prominent public intellectuals such as UK economist <a href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/profile/nicholas-stern/">Nicholas Stern</a>, former <a href="http://www.algore.com/">US Vice President Al Gore</a>, The New York Times’ writer <a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/author/andrew-c-revkin/">Andrew Revkin</a>, and Oxford University anthropologist <a href="http://www.keble.ox.ac.uk/academics/about/professor-steve-rayner">Steve Rayner.</a></p>
<p>Gore and Stern differ from Klein in arguing that climate change can be tackled primarily through market-based policies like <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/al-gore-put-price-carbon-131955992.html">carbon pricing</a>, rejecting the idea that we must choose between growing the economy and fighting climate change.</p>
<p>In contrast, Rayner was among the first public intellectuals to argue that climate change is more accurately framed as an <a href="http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/a_new_approach_on_global_clima">energy innovation and societal resilience problem</a>. He has also <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7165/full/449973a.html">strongly questioned</a> the pursuit of a binding international agreement to limit emissions. </p>
<p>Similarly, as Revkin <a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/humanitys-long-climate-and-energy-march/">recently noted</a>, contrary to the arguments of Klein, renewable energy sources alone are not likely to meet the “intertwined challenges of expanding energy access [among the world’s poor] while limiting global warming.” Like Rayner, he argues that we need to rethink our assumptions, and broaden the menu of policy options and technologies considered.</p>
<p>On the need to diversify approaches, Stern along with Columbia University economist <a href="http://jeffsachs.org/">Jeffrey Sachs</a> have <a href="http://newclimateeconomy.net/content/press-release-economic-growth-and-action-climate-change-can-now-be-achieved-together-finds">offered similar arguments</a>, but place much stronger faith than either Rayner or Revkin in the ability of a global international agreement to decarbonize the world economy, <a href="http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/deep-decarbonization-pathways/">guided by timetables, temperature targets, carbon budgets, research and development investments</a> and <a href="http://newclimateeconomy.net/content/press-release-economic-growth-and-action-climate-change-can-now-be-achieved-together-finds">carbon pricing signals</a>.</p>
<p>In defining what climate change means, these public intellectuals and others help create a common outlook, informally guiding the work of like-minded advocates, funders, journalists, and governmental officials. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60681/original/c23npn3t-1412269935.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Public intellectuals and their views on climate change. Zoom for more detail.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matthew Nisbet</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Given the complexity of climate change as a social problem it is possible for competing narratives and explanations about its social implications and solutions to exist. </p>
<p>So it is not surprising that among public intellectuals there is disagreement over what the issue means for society, leading to intense clashes among those who look to one discourse over another to guide their work. </p>
<p>Revkin, for example, <a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/more-on-tar-oil-pipelines-and-presidents/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0">has criticized</a> the grassroots campaign against the Keystone XL oil pipeline as distracting from the “core issues involving our energy future and is largely insignificant if your concern is averting a buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”</p>
<p>He has also argued the need to chart a path to a “<a href="http://nyti.ms/1kwU4pX">Good Anthropocene</a>”. In this new “Age of Us”, humans have generated considerable ecological and social risks, but at the same time, in the face of this uncertainty, possess the ability to create a better future through technological innovation and resilience strategies.</p>
<p>Not surprisingly, Bill McKibben dismisses Revkin’s outlook on climate change as “<a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/more-on-tar-oil-pipelines-and-presidents/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0.">relentlessly middle seeking</a>.” Incredible Hulk actor Mark Ruffalo, who opposes the pipeline, has called Revkin a “<a href="http://ensia.com/voices/why-its-good-to-debate-strategies-to-address-climate-change/">climate coward</a>.” </p>
<p>For his part, Clive Hamilton <a href="http://clivehamilton.com/the-delusion-of-the-good-anthropocene-reply-to-andrew-revkin/">argues that</a> Revkin and other public intellectuals promoting the possibility of the “good Anthropocene” are “unscientific and live in a fantasy world of their own construction.”</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/60685/original/zkssb9zf-1412270883.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gore: We can fight climate change and grow the economy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/AlGoreGlobalWarmingTalk.jpg">Breuwi</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These disagreements over the social implications of climate change reflect differing values, intellectual traditions, and visions of the “good society.” They are embedded in contrasting beliefs about nature, risk, progress, authority, and technology. </p>
<p>In this battle among competing ideas, climate change becomes “a synecdoche – a figurative turn of phrase in which something stands in for something else — for something much more important than simply the way humans are changing the weather,” <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/wcc.317">notes Kings College London’s Mike Hulme</a> (a public intellectual himself). </p>
<p>Reading Klein, it is clear that she is not confident that the mass movement she calls for and the deep structural reforms that “change everything” are achievable. Instead, like radical intellectuals of movements past, her utopian vision serves an important political function, creating space for <a href="http://ensia.com/voices/a-new-model-for-climate-advocacy/">more pragmatic, less revolutionary social innovations</a>.</p>
<p>Many who are inspired by Klein’s arguments will take to the streets, to social media, and to campuses to wage battle for their worldviews. For the rest of us, we should carefully engage with Klein’s ideas, seeking out with equal enthusiasm and critical reflection the arguments of other public intellectuals in the climate debate. </p>
<p>The goal is not to choose among competing perspectives, but to grapple with their tensions and uncertainties. Through this process, as we call on our political leaders to act and work with others on solutions, we can hold our own convictions and opinions more lightly; identifying what is of value among the ideas offered by those on the left, right, and in the center.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32072/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Nisbet has received research grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation. His own outlook on the social implications of climate change is closest to that of the Ecomodernists (see table).</span></em></p>Earth is “fucked” and our insatiable growth economy is to blame. So argues Naomi Klein in her intentionally provocative best-seller This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Klein is the latest…Matthew C. Nisbet, Associate Professor of Communication, Northeastern UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/317562014-09-29T13:26:15Z2014-09-29T13:26:15ZBook review: Naomi Klein finds kernels of hope amid climate change and untamed capitalism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60210/original/8b8nyxc9-1411912696.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=159%2C39%2C864%2C645&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Attacking the climate capitalists</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/truthout/4152992081/in/photolist-4SThrU-7jZaRK-atzjK7-atwxYc-5uFddz-4SThpS-34sgba-524tUo-51ZjwR-7ozg1W-7nmfVT-ebusvW-4rKgik-7ozvcA-3hNftq-33DXQc-7ovB7v-5vo7bk-38UMrF-3sxj4x">Truthout.org</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Naomi Klein’s <a href="http://www.naomiklein.org/main">third attack on capitalism</a>, This Changes Everything, has put the urgency of climate change front and centre. As ever for Klein, unrestrained capitalism is the root problem and has to be dealt with, however difficult that might be – and however much money and power is propping it up. </p>
<p>Our response so far has been hopeless, but she is able to point to recent signs that we might yet achieve the radical change we need: push hard now is the message. </p>
<p>As in her previous works, Klein’s latest book shows off her mastery of the ruthless exposé. Corruption, underhand practices and deliberate bullshit are hauled into view from wherever she finds them. Although it leaves a depressing reminder of how pervasive this stuff is, we need more of this type of journalism to keep it at bay. We are given a rogues’ gallery of incongruous policies whose architects we should laugh out of politics, of businesses that have been getting away with <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/series/greenwash">greenwash</a> and of environmental organisations seduced down the garden path of fossil fuel funding. </p>
<p>This book was five years in the making – and one place this shows up is in the quality of detail. </p>
<p>When she’s lambasting greenwash merchants for disingenuous messages, there is a sense, backed up by her track record, that she has got her facts straight. This book is peppered with scathing, chilling and depressing tales of those whose actions collude deliberately, or accidentally, with the ever-increasing extraction of fossil fuel – whether they be environmental movements or celebrity entrepreneurs.</p>
<h2>Virgin territory</h2>
<p>Richard Branson gets some sharp treatment for the incongruity between his words and actions: the aggressive growth of his carbon-belching airline and a failure to deliver anything but the smallest fraction of <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5368194.stm">his promised US$3 billion fund</a> to fight global warming.</p>
<p>Environmental organisations are exposed for their reliance on fossil fuel funding and Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have their fossil fuel investments brought out into the cold light of day. The hijacking of the environmental agenda by big business is vividly exposed along with the wishful thinking that climate change can be addressed without significant rearrangement of the terms of engagement of oil companies, and airlines. All this is important stuff.</p>
<p>But much more than a series of vignettes, this is a book about a macro issue. Klein is not in the mood for sticking plasters to cure the climate change problem – she wants to get to the root cause. Climate change demands an urgent response at the global system level. And since unrestrained capitalism is incapable of delivering such an intervention, climate change gives Klein one more argument for taking a pop at her number one enemy. In fact she is unapologetic that what sparked her interest in climate change was the focus it brought to some of capitalism’s shortcomings. </p>
<p>There is good focus on the psychology of denial, which is probably the crux of the climate change puzzle. Klein argues powerfully that unrestrained capitalism has had a central role in keeping us from waking up.</p>
<h2>Fighting a new slavery</h2>
<p>But if we tamed capitalism, would a fix for emissions follow? I would have liked more on the fundamental dynamics of energy, efficiency and growth – and a clearer pathway to the low-carbon world once capitalism has been tamed. There is a lot more to cutting fossil fuel than developing renewables. </p>
<p>I hope this book has great capacity to influence. It’s a sad reality that most people who deny the problem or don’t already see the need for major market interventions probably won’t pick it up despite her effort to write for those who don’t buy books on climate change. At the very least, This Changes Everything should help arm the converted.</p>
<p>Many will love the writing style Klein uses, with the arguments unfolding slowly in powerful prose, laced with anecdotes. If you like each chapter to reveal itself in the first paragraph then you will need more patience. But in the end what I liked most was the hopeful conclusion. Not optimism that we will all be fine, but well-argued hope that despite our utter failure so far we might yet react in time if we pull our fingers out. Why? Because social tipping points can happen so fast and our species has shown that it can get a lot done quickly once its properly awake to a problem. </p>
<p>Slavery was as profitable as fossil fuel, but we still overcame it (<a href="https://theconversation.com/slavery-is-a-crime-it-shouldnt-be-up-to-consumers-to-fight-it-28347">or perhaps not quite, but we made good headway</a>). Apartheid fell without the bloodbath everyone feared. Klein sees small signs of headway now that weren’t there a few years ago and (like me) believes in the possibility that from here things might just be able to change fast enough – if we all push hard now.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Mike Berners-Lee is co-author of <a href="http://www.burningquestion.info/">The Burning Question</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Bad-Are-Bananas-everything/dp/1846688914">How Bad Are Bananas? The carbon footprint of everything</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/31756/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Berners-Lee is the founding director of Small World Consulting which helps organisations understand and respond to the climate change agenda.</span></em></p>Naomi Klein’s third attack on capitalism, This Changes Everything, has put the urgency of climate change front and centre. As ever for Klein, unrestrained capitalism is the root problem and has to be dealt…Mike Berners-Lee, Visiting professor, Lancaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.