Climate Media Specializes in Spin, not Solutions
Even when certain facts are true, it's what they don't tell you that throws you off their trail.
“The press is the hired agent of a moneyed system and set up for no other purpose than to tell lies where their interests are involved.” —Henry Adams
Mainstream climate media are involved in a massive deception. Not like it’s intentional or purposeful. But they know where their bread is buttered. They know who signs their paychecks. And they know how to tell stories that are flattering to their owners and sponsors.
They tell us that CO2 has been rising and so have global temperatures. So far, so good. But the whole rest of the story exists to mislead you as to the real problems and the real solutions.
This is a critique of a May 8 article from The Guardian, entitled: We asked 380 top climate scientists what they felt about the future … They are terrified but determined to keep fighting. Here’s what they said.
All block quotes below are from this one article.
In this piece, we will talk about:
What is the true nature of the media as it relates to climate change?
What is the true nature and purpose of government, as it relates to climate change?
If scientists are so knowledgeable, why are they giving us the runaround?
What is the true nature of the climate crisis?
This is an invitation to use our critical thinking skills and to look at what is really going on. Don’t believe the rhetoric of the powerful. Look at what they do. This includes powerful politicians and governments and powerful media outlets. It also means scrutinizing the rhetoric of scientists, however seemingly humble or well-intentioned. Look at the stories they are telling and then ask whether those stories are true.
The Guardian article states:
A world of climate chaos would require a much greater focus on protecting people from inevitable impacts, said many scientists, but again politics stands in the way.
When it says “politics” what are they talking about? Are they talking about government of the people, by the people and for the people? Ok. But is that a reality? Or is that just what we are led to believe in? I submit to you that “government of the people, by the people and for the people” exists more in mythology than reality. It’s something we are taught to believe in. It keeps us docile and compliant. It keeps us from solving real problems, because we don’t know what they problems are. We only know the version we are told, not the reality.
If we are to get upset, we get upset at our neighbor, or the other political party. But we don’t get upset at the people who have the real power and the real control.
The Guardian article laments:
“Multiple trillions of dollars were liquidated for use during the pandemic, yet it seems there is not enough political will to commit several billion dollars to adaptation funding,” said Shobha Maharaj, from Trinidad and Tobago.
That’s right. “Multiple trillions were liquidated for use during the pandemic.” Only a fraction of it went straight to the people for their use and benefit. The ruling class used the pandemic as an excuse to transfer trillions of dollars to the richest few.
According to Stafford Beer, the Purpose Of a System Is What It Does. The acronym is POSIWID. Don’t look at the rhetoric. Look at the reality.
During the pandemic, the government performed its intended purpose, which is to transfer money to the richest few. That is its purpose. That’s not what we were taught in school. That’s not what we see on the news. But that’s what happened. We should look mainly at what actually happened, not the rhetoric.
Environmentalists will continue to be caught flat-footed, and the environment will continue to get worse and worse, if we don’t see our corporate-controlled government for what it is—a tool in the hands of the wealthy few. It does not exist to benefit the people or the planet.
We can talk about what we should want from our government. And we should have that conversation. But the first step is to diagnose the problem for what it is and get our heads out of fantasyland.
The Guardian article laments politicians and oil companies:
The capture of politicians and the media by vastly wealthy fossil fuel companies and petrostates, whose oil, gas and coal are the root cause of the climate crisis, was frequently cited.
We are treated to a fairy tale in which fossil fuel companies and “petrostates” are the villain of the plot. Fossil fuel companies have become a safe target. If you’re a politician, you can criticize fossil fuel companies and get away with it, because your constituents expect you to, and your donors allow you to.
Just so you don’t criticize Wal-Mart or Wall Street or economic growth or planned obsolescence or the complete corporate takeover of our economy and government.
Fossil fuel companies are just fine as long as we have endless war, “free trade” (a misnomer) and fossil fuel intensive agriculture.
Railing against fossil fuel companies will not solve any problems. And that’s the way it is supposed to work. We are not supposed to be solving problems. We are supposed to pretend to solve problems.
The vulnerable will suffer, we are told:
Stephen Humphreys at the London School of Economics said: “The tacit calculus of decision-makers, particularly in the Anglosphere – US, Canada, UK, Australia – but also Russia and the major fossil fuel producers in the Middle East, is driving us into a world in which the vulnerable will suffer, while the well-heeled will hope to stay safe above the waterline”
When they say “decision-makers [are] driving us into a world in which the vulnerable will suffer …” this is not new, and it is not news. That’s the only world we’ve ever known in modern times. Vulnerable people suffer. And the number of vulnerable people is not diminishing. POSIWID. The purpose of a system is what it does. Our system creates vulnerable people and causes them to suffer.
At this point, it may seem like I’m whining. I’m really not. I’m only trying to distinguish between reality and fantasy, and encourage environmentalists to stop living the fantasy that says we have a “government of the people, by the people and for the people.”
Poor people outnumber any other class of people. If we had a government of the people by the people for the people, then the poor people of the world would have the most control of government. But this is not the case.
Maybe we don’t have one person one vote. Maybe we have something closer to one dollar one vote.
Just maybe.
And again. The purpose is not to lament. The purpose is to think clearly and see clearly.
“The enormity of the problem is not well understood,” said Ralph Sims, at Massey University in New Zealand. “So there will be environmental refugees by the millions, extreme weather events escalating, food and water shortages, before the majority accept the urgency in reducing emissions – by which time it will be too late.”
Who does not understand “the enormity of the problem”? More to the point, what is the exact nature of this enormous problem? Nearly everything I read about climate says that CO2 is the enormous problem. And the solution to this enormous problem is “renewable energy.”
As if CO2 is the only thing causing global warming. We are not going to talk about hot surfaces, human-caused sand (from desertification) or bare dirt (in crop fields, due to lack of cover crops). We are not going to talk about desertification. We are not going to talk about water vapor that is stranded in the atmosphere and causing global warming because we lack the living systems that would otherwise convert water vapor to cloud cover.
And we are asked to believe that CO2 will decline when we implement “renewable energy.” As if CO2 will decline in the context of a growing economy with growing energy demands. As if the problem is how we generate energy, not what we use that energy to do. As if solar powered chain saws and solar powered aircraft carriers will reduce CO2 and solve global warming.
This is the stuff of pure fantasy.
We are leaving everything to chance.
The article asserts that a minority of scientists are optimistic. The article asks:
So why are these scientists optimistic? One reason is the rapid rollout of green technologies from renewable energy to electric cars, driven by fast-falling prices and the multiple associated benefits they bring, such as cleaner air. “It is getting cheaper and cheaper to save the climate,” said Lars Nilsson, at Lund University in Sweden.
Scientists are optimistic because of the rapid rollout of green technologies, including renewable energy and electric cars. No mention of any climate solutions other than profitable corporate products. No mention of ecological solutions. No mention of how our living systems regulate our climate.
As if the planet suffers because humans don’t have enough technology. Yea. That’s it. That’s the ticket.
There is no mention here of changing our agricultural system. There is no mention of rethinking our economic priorities and spending more time and money caring for what we have, instead of always producing more and consuming more. There is no mention here of redesigning our economy to encourage more local consumption. No mention of the need to reduce defense spending.
And these are scientists talking. But where is the objectivity? Why are all of their scientific “solutions” found only in profitable corporate products?
Back to our original point. The purpose of our system is to give more power and more money to those who already have it.
Again, I’m not whining. I’m not lamenting my own circumstances. I live a life of relative comfort.
But I look around me and I see a world hellbent on consuming more, producing more and extracting more, not because that’s what people want, but because that’s what is best for the powerful.
That needs to change, because this is a world that will never protect people or the planet, and will never solve climate change. We haven’t yet. And we won’t.
**********
If you enjoy this content (bleak as it may seem ;-) please know that I focus on solutions, not just problems. The solutions are to be found in my course Healing Our Land & Our Climate.
The course starts on July 9, but we are offering a free webinar on June 25 at noon. Please click on this link to sign up for the course and/or the webinar.
The idea behind the course and the webinar is that we must heal our land first, in order to heal our climate.
Here’s why.
We have a livable planet because we have a living planet. Life creates the conditions for life. Living systems create the conditions in which they might thrive. Without those living systems, our planet cannot regulate our temperatures.
And yet… we never hear about this.
The great news is that WE CAN TAKE ACTION. And that action can be FUN!
In Healing Our Land & Our Climate, we will talk about healing our land, starting with our farmland and our forests and moving to our own home gardens and landscapes.
We will share this journey with farmers, gardeners and landscapers, as well as scientists such as geologists, biologists and ecologists, all of whom can teach us how to Heal Our Land.