Should we tolerate climate denial?

At 18.27 on 12 December 2015, Laurent Fabius brought down his gavel to mark the adoption of the Paris Agreement by nearly 200 countries. Even the most optimistic commentators agree that the scale and speed of the action needed to realize the ambitions of the Agreement are daunting. The history of action on climate change gives us no grounds for optimism. But perhaps, we still have grounds for hope (McKinnon 2014). Many things could snuff out this fragile hope. In this article, I shall address conduct that explicitly aims to do so: climate change denial (from here on in, “climate denial”). By “climate denial,” I mean the deliberate and deceptive misrepresentation of the scientific realities of climate change, such as the fact that climate change is happening, its anthropogenic causes, and its damaging impacts (Dunlap 2013). What I do not mean by “climate denial” are minority or outlier positions on aspects of climate science that lie within the range of normal and healthy disciplinary disagreement. There is an established international network of well-funded organizations devoted to organized climate denial, and their activity is on the increase (Boussalis and Coan 2016). The epicenter of this activity is in the United States, where climate denial has had a significant impact on public opinion (Leiserowitz et al. 2014), and has impeded legislation to tackle climate change (Farrell 2016; Oreskes and Conway 2012). My question is: should we tolerate climate denial? The “we” in this question refers to broadly liberal people and legislators in democratic societies, for whom principles of toleration and the virtue of tolerance are of fundamental importance in social and political life. Toleration is a matter of principled self-restraint with respect to conduct that would alter, suppress, or prevent the characteristics or conduct of people opposed by the tolerator (McKinnon 2006; McKinnon and Castiglione 2003). The tolerant agent refrains from interfering with those she dislikes or of whom she disapproves even when she believes that her dislike or disapproval is well-grounded. The agents of toleration can be individual people—when toleration is likely to manifest as a virtue, or as a civic disposition—or institutions, when fundamental political principles, the constitution, and laws and their implementation, are framed to respect the limits of toleration (McKinnon 2013). Toleration is difficult to justify and hard to practice at both the personal and institutional level, particularly for liberals (Scanlon 2003a). Liberalism is committed to freedom of association, conscience, worship, movement, and expression as a matter of fundamental principle (Rawls 1971). This delivers a distinctive liberal, permissive vision of the limits of toleration with respect to acts of expression. Given that climate denial is achieved through acts of expression, there is a heavy burden of proof attached to any liberal proposal to be intolerant of climate denial.1 My aim in this short article is to identify the proper site for this debate. What are the questions to be answered in deciding whether climate denial lies beyond the limits of liberal toleration? Although I do not answer these questions, by correctly identifying them I hope to show that the burden of proof is perhaps not as heavy as we initially might have thought

\u3ci\u3eClimate, Complacency and American Culture: The Role of Narrative in the Era of the Misinformation Amid the Anthropocene\u3c/i\u3e

This article explores the relationship between climate misinformation campaigns and narratives in light of skepticism and denial of climate change in the era of the Anthropocene. Beginning in the earliest moments of human existence, this paper establishes the importance of narratives in the founding of modern humanity and how such foundational stories has led to our current Anthropogenic world. It goes on to examine misinformation created and funded by politically powerful foundations and companies that distorts the current discussions of climate change among the American public. In leu of the abundance of climate misinformation, this paper also analyzes how the complex emotions inherent in climate change can rationalize the blatant fallacies presented in misinformation campaigns and why they remain socially and politically salient. Given such emotional perils that are unequivocally intertwined with existing in a radically shifting climate, it is necessary to invoke a greater emotional response that overpowers the fear and anxiety that rationalizes the belief in misinformation. Grounded in such emotions inherent in the era of the Anthropocene, this paper argues that narratives and the art of storytelling, the very foundation of what it means to be human, are uniquely suited to convey the severity of climate change. They have the power to invoke an empathic response which works to reverse the hold misinformation has over a sector of the American public that drives climate change skepticism and denial

Climate change scepticism is largely social and not scientific in nature

Adam Corner argues that social views and cultural beliefs predict climate change denial, and not people’s level of knowledge about climate science. The crux of the climate debate, therefore, lies in untangling the competing visions of how people see the world

Understanding New Zealand public opinion on climate change : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Politics at Massey University, Manawatū, New Zealand

This project explored how climate change is understood by members of the New Zealand public and how these understandings relate to their climate-related policy preferences and actions. Although climate change is regarded as one of the most serious threats facing humanity, there remains a gap between scientific findings and the political responses in New Zealand and the wider international community. Given that public opinion is a key driver to political action on the matter, it is important to understand its complexities, how it is constructed and shaped, and how it relates to behavioural preferences and practices. The research literature, however, reveals an emphasis on the polling of New Zealanders' opinions on climate change and a neglect of these dynamics. To address this lacuna, the study explored the climate change understandings and actions of six New Zealanders in rural and urban settings. In-depth, semi-structured, one-on-one interviews and the methodological approach of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis were used to gain rich insight into the lived experiences of climate change. The analysis of data revealed four key themes, which depicted climate change as a physical process; as a sociocultural story; as a personal story; and as a call to action. Despite a general understanding of the veracity of climate change and its human causation there is evidence of widespread conflation with other environmental phenomena, distrust of elites, and subtle forms of denial, which together hamper effective action. Shaped by various beliefs, values, and experiences, the heterogeneity of interpretations implies the need for disaggregated research into climate change public opinion, and for tailored strategies in designing climate policy, activating behavioural change, engendering policy support, and mobilising collective action

Canary in the coalmine: Norwegian attitudes towards climate change and extreme long-haul air travel to Aotearoa/New Zealand

Accelerating global climate change poses considerable challenges to all societies and economies. The European Union now targets a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020. Indeed, the Labour-led Norwegian government is committed to carbon neutrality across all sectors of the economy by 2030. Aviation has been identified as a rapidly growing contributor to CO2 emissions. This article reports on a research project that explored Norwegian attitudes towards climate change, particularly as they relate to extreme long-haul air travel to Aotearoa/New Zealand. It reveals that the 'dream trip' to New Zealand for Norwegians is still largely intact. It also finds evidence of 'air travel with a carbon conscience' arising from growing concern for high frequency discretionary air travel. Evidence of denial of the climate impact of air travel that recent studies have revealed was largely absent. Interviewees expressed a greater concern for short-haul air travel emissions than for the climate impact of long-haul travel. However, intentions to adapt long-haul travel behaviours were expressed, highlighting the need to monitor consumer attitudes towards the impact of air travel on climate change. We conclude that Norway is a vanguard European tourism market in terms of climate sensitivity

Climate change and rising energy costs will change everything: A new mindset and action plan for 21st Century public health

Western governments currently prioritize economic growth and the pursuit of profit above alternative goals of sustainability, health and equality. Climate change and rising energy costs are challenging this consensus. The realization of the transformation required to meet these challenges has provoked denial and conflict, but could lead to a more positive response which leads to a health dividend; enhanced well-being, less overconsumption and greater equality. This paper argues that public health can make its best contribution by adopting a new mindset, discourse, methodology and set of tasks

Do male climate change 'sceptics' have a problem with women?

Although clearly not all climate change 'sceptics' are male, writes Bob Ward, it does appear that those who most intensely promote climate change denial are usually male, and routinely refer to female climate scientists in a dismissive way. He provides some evidence for his argument

Anti-reflexivity and climate change skepticism in the US general public

The leading theoretical explanation for the mobilization of organized climate change denial is the Anti-Reflexivity Thesis, which characterizes the climate change denial countermovement as a collective force defending the industrial capitalist system. In this study, I demonstrate that the Anti-Reflexivity Thesis also provides theoretical purchase for explaining patterns of climate change skepticism among regular citizens. Analyzing nationally representative survey data from multiple waves of the University of Texas Energy Poll, I examine key predictors of climate change skepticism within the US general public. Identification with or trust in groups representing the industrial capitalist system increases the likelihood of climate change skepticism. Also, identification with or trust in groups representing forces of reflexivity (e.g., the environmental movement and scientific community) decreases the likelihood of such skepticism. Further, this study finds that climate change skeptics report policy preferences, voting intentions, and behavioral intentions generally supportive of the existing fossil fuels–based industrial capitalist system

Ecological Crisis, or “Intersex Panic,” as Answer of the Real?

Drawing upon Cal’s eventual metamorphosis into “The [white] Man” in Middlesex, and an examination of the Real of ecological crisis, Hsu explores the intersection of environmental racism, climate change denial, and intersex discrimination in order to advocate for a renewed awareness of ecological interdependency and the need for self-determination of people of colour in ecological and environmental justice discourses

Trump, climate change and white US Evangelicalism

President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate accord last week was made possible by the rise of a climate-denying faction within white US Evangelicalism. Over the past decade this growing faction has come to regard the very idea of climate change as a threat to their identity, presenting climate discourse as a cultural attack on the embattled Christian identity. Willis Jenkins argues that we should view this climate denial not as the result of a religious narrative, but as a way of avoiding accountability for polluting the atmosphere