Xaxnar just wrote a great piece on Climate Change, which I heartily promote. One of the things that came up in the discussion is the problem with outreach, getting people to A) accept that the science is good and this transformation is a direct threat to our survival, and B) getting people to change their habits in response to that knowledge. Jump through the orange flaming hoop below if you are interested in exploring this matter with me.
Xaxnar--you just keep nailing things on the head for me. I am really enjoying that.
Disclaimer: Now I am offering my observations which are highly personal. Think of it, as a friendly person who agrees with you, but is still on the outside. So none of this is meant to be anything other than an idea generator for the people who are organizing.
Back to the story:
Years ago, when I wore the uniform, someone once told me that the word, NAVY was an acronym for: Never Again Volunteer Yourself. I never learned my lesson. I keep signing up to help organize things like a sucker, and have been doing it for the better part of 20 years. And if you have ever spent a few years working as a volunteer, there are some things that one notices.
1. In many organizations, much of the running and coordinating, almost always falls on the same 5 to 10 people. That often this core group will take turns being the President and Vice President and Secretary, and Treasurer over and over and over, like a merry-go-round.
2. Your work might be meaningful, but in times when membership is sparse, even that can feel thankless and unappreciated.
3. You might also deal with people who will not volunteer to serve in any meaningful capacity, but are just sure they can do it better, and will often undermine the leadership, but never offer to take on the full mantle of responsibility OF the leadership.
4. Organizations that consist primarily of the core group can break down, because it feels like they keep saying the same thing over and over and yet they never get traction.
Enter the Environmentalist and the Environmental Movement:
It seems that early on, Environmentalism felt like it was made into a dirty word/concept, much like the word Feminist. Even though the notion of keeping clean air, clean water, soil and the like, preserving species diversity and generally not shitting where one eats feels like common sense to me, somehow Environmentalism came to mean something else, like Feminism came to mean Man-Hating Femi-Nazi.
We now know that uncountable dollars have been launched for decades to accomplish this. To not just cast doubt on the science, but to also make sure that most environmentalism is considered woo woo fringe.
But environmentalism already had some very big strikes against it, the biggest being that 1) People seem to instinctively resist change, even if the change will benefit them, and 2) Multi-generational habits die hard.
I believe that number (2) is the most damning. So what do I mean by that? I came to environmentalism as an adult. And this was because of two reasons: 1. My parents saw no reason to practice what they thought were self limiting habits associated with environmentalism way back in the day, and 2) our infrastructure makes it so that we have to fight to practice environmentalism at all, in most places, whether it be rural or urban.
Both of these: Infrastructure and adult modeling contribute to the Multi-generational habits that will not die, whether it be food waste, electronic waste, wasting water, wasting fossil fuels, etc.,
Nothing in this culture, until the last 10 years was built with environmentalism in mind. Instead it was constructed from the inception of the industrial age, so that people lived in a manner that made for conveniences, and made certain industries lots of money.
No one thinks about all the processing that goes into making tiny ketchup packets that we throw away by the billions. No one thinks about how much coal might be used to generate the electricity that runs the processing plant that sorts and cooks and renders down the tomatoes and other ingredients, or the petroleum products used to make the plastic packets, nor the waste that is generated after the fact. All they see are convenient little packets of ketchup that come in their fast food orders. I haven't even touched on how the tomatoes get there, that's a whole other gigantic carbon, pesticide and herbicide footprint.
Our culture engineered things to be this way. It was considered progress and modernization, but people in their rush to modern conveniences were not (til lately) generally looking at the (total) price to manufacture and distribute these modern conveniences, nor the land fill issues they make after they are used and discarded. This is the mentality that believes that resources are unlimited, and although many know that is not really the case, we find ourselves at a loss, when trying to find a meaningful way to counter that mentality, and those habits, in the midst of being overworked and underpaid.
This is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding why the average citizen feels completely helpless, and overwhelmed by the thought of climate change and having to stave it off or otherwise live through it and adapt.
If they adapt now, tremendous pressure is put on them by political pundits, neighbors or relatives, and corporations, to stop. And if they don't--they are labeled that woo woo fringe of alarmists. Meanwhile every act they take to become more "Green" is like swimming up river against the current just in terms of making those physical and mental changes even in the absence of social and corporate bullying. This is exhausting and can feel very hopeless, especially if the person trying to make these changes has no viable social-environmental support system.
They need a counter to all that bullying, an antidote; they need nurturing and encouragement. No matter how bad it is out there, how bad things have gotten, we have to spend the energy and the time, to flipping every mindset we can, so that they embrace the mentality of "doing the least amount of harm" to the environment every day. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Feminist called this Consciousness Raising. I posit that this may be an appropriate tactic on an individual scale to consider.
Another interesting piece on Consciousness Raising.
Remember, to label or imply something is overly feminine is to make it "Woo Woo Fringe". To me Woo Woo is painfully similar to Hoo Haw which is a nonsense word used to name the Vagina. Being Green is often about nurturing your community, about nurturing nature, your garden, being gentle, and this would be as threatening to "Murkin Machismo" as making certain males eat Quiche. Being Green is also about sustainability, which delves into Birth Control, and we all know who is absolutely terrified of the notion of accessible safe Birth Control.
Should we decouple these ideas from Feminism? Paganism? Animal Rights movements? And all the other "isms" that so terrify those undecided voters and baggers, and religionists who see the green movement as just another theater in their Culture War? I don't have the answer to this, but I see this as part of the issue, part of the disconnect. I wrestle with the notion--Do my Human Rights as a female need to be subsumed for the sake of our survival as a species? Or should I step back and let nature do her worst?
(The Culture War--is about certain religious extremists who fight tooth and nail, against all progressive social change, including fighting the poverty cycle, women's Human-Rights, GLBT Human Rights, Religious Pluralism, Social Pluralism, Environmentalism, Racial Civil Rights, and who have actively been campaigning to end the Wall of Separation between Church and State, and who actively seek to take over the country, community by community from the ground up (see Stealth Campaigns). Acknowledging this is very important to understanding how certain economic giants have been able to use religious groups to further their anti-climate agenda too. The marriage between the RWNJs and Fossil Fuels should not be ignored.
In some places, even people to the far right have had to embrace some notions of sustainability, if for no other reason, than climate change is directly affecting their livelihoods, and their bottom line. But to come out and point that out is to start a fight of--um, Biblical Proportions. This sometimes comes out in the wash on fights over Fracking, Property Rights, and NAFTA.
So what we are dealing with here is the need for a mass paradigm shift towards understanding and embracing change, during a time when many people feel the most insecure they have ever felt about the way the country is going and about their hopes for a prosperous or happy future. That means getting them to change will require a lot more understanding, a lot more effort and patience. People don't like to change under the best of circumstances, rock that boat a little, and they will become intellectually fossilized out of pure unadulterated fear.
And so, certain political and economic and religious forces have taken turns rocking the boat so violently, that even open minded individuals are white knuckled and upset.
How do you convince someone who has to get their food from a food bank, to change to a more green mindset?
How do you even broach the topic at all with someone who goes to a church that equates acceptance of global climate change to Paganism or Satanism?
Some Christians do embrace this, but not all, though this rift is acknowledged and discussed in that community.
How do we get people who believe the end is nigh, to make such an effort to mitigate the climate change that is already happening? This story also shows the disconnect over climate change, being part and parcel with the distrust of Science/Scientists, and the Government. I posit that this distrust isn't purely irrational, but in fact the Christian version of mistrust of large, powerful, wealthy entities. They won't necessarily adopt the same language as environmentalists who distrust corporate power, so the Christians are left with the Government and Scientists to blame in order to maintain their differences. And there are times when there can be overlap. The government does not work for us right now (as a people) but instead for corporations. Both groups feel at the mercy of larger entities, but disagree on who that is, and what to do about it. Meanwhile climate change marches on.
Some people aren't going to change, ever. They are selfish. And there is nothing you can do about it. But as we all change our habits and create community connections through those changes, we can make that part of the social contract that denotes good behavior. That will take time. And even then, that would be a power that requires mindfulness in the wielding.
I remember when people used to pour pesticides and used motor oil on the ground and in the storm drains. It took a long time to make that not just illegal, but also something that you didn't want your neighbors to witness you doing.
Every big change, legal and social, takes time. So that means while we are fighting that slow fight for legal changes, and widespread social changes, that we have to be patient for the good ideas to catch on with others who are not convinced yet, or who just don't know about this stuff.
There is that old saying, "Save the ones you can," which is a sort of triage mentality. And I feel that this may be useful in the now. Reach the people you can. Don't expect perfection or absolute agreement. Building new habits is work, this is a ground up change in every individual life, right down to how and what one cooks for meals. This is where the volunteerism comes in.
Have you considered volunteering your time to teach just one person how to make these changes? Do you have it within you to do that? Can you take on such a thankless task that will be labor intensive and never turn out the way you want to?
First ask yourself, "What can you personally do in your life to mitigate this change?" and then start making those adaptations.
Then ask yourself, "Do I know someone who would be open to making adaptations themselves, and what can I do to assist them, to speed that process up?"
There might even be people in your life right now, who want to change, but just need some basic instruction. I know I was one of those people. I had to pay to take classes and spend money on books. I am still learning, but the people around me think that I am some kind of guru (which is not true). I try to encourage them and give them information and help whenever I can, remembering what it was like to not get that help and encouragement when I sure could have used it. If I know someone who is really impoverished, I might sometimes hit the used book store and buy them a book or two about the topic of their interest.
I was determined, but I don't assume everyone else is so determined. I operate on the assumption that this is the one chance anyone has, to help one more person take those first steps to make that change.
If every person who wants to mitigate the coming climate change, turned and picked one willing individual to mentor for a year, (even if informally) we could double our numbers. And that's not counting traditional forms of political activism, which will also have a positive effect, and that includes voting.
If you taught one person how to conserve water and alternatives to pesticide and herbicide usage--what a difference that could make.
If you taught one person the basics of organic and pesticide free gardening and composting and recycling trash--what a difference that could make.
If you taught someone how to cook healthier meals from a more sustainable grocery list--what a difference that could make.
If you bought an impoverished neighbor new energy efficient light bulbs--what a difference that could make.
Small steps are all that is necessary. Total agreement on all things political is not necessary to make these changes. And each person you touch in real life in a positive way is yet enough opportunity to build the kind of communities we will need on a local level for communities to survive the coming climate changes.
Thanks again for Xaxnar's diary and for asking the questions that inspired this response.