Skip to main content
June 23, 2009 – Now there’s an interesting riddle: How does one go about making people less afraid of acknowledging climate change? I think that if this riddle could be untangled, it might also provide an at least partial answer to the question about avoiding panic.
In my opinion, one primary reason people are afraid of the subject of climate change is that they are bombarded with information about a host of very serious problems, all of which need to be addressed. Here’s where we make use of a gift that just keeps on giving. Division of labor. Does everybody in the world need to become involved in this discussion? Thank goodness, the answer is No. A significant number of people? Yes. Here’s where overpopulation may actually work to our advantage. There are enough of us to work on all the problems that confront us. Enough brain power, enough ideas, enough muscle, enough good will. In a sense, this division of labor has already taken place. Those of us who are active members of Sierra Club, the National Wildlife Federation, the Nature Conservancy, and other organizations like them, have already signed on. We know there’s a problem and are eager to address it. However, the one aspect of the problem not receiving enough attention from these organizations is educating the public. Telling people they need to recycle just isn’t enough anymore. It is imperative that we move to the next stage. These organizations must determine what the next stage is, and come up with the money to pay for public service announcements on television. LOTS OF THEM. This is the only way I know of to disseminate information widely and quickly.
Why should private organizations undertake this costly endeavor?
Because the government has failed to do so, and because these groups say they exist in order to protect the environment (among other things). Until government assumes its rightful place in the mix, private environmental organizations must serve as its surrogate. In doing so, they will contribute to the creation of a better-informed public.
A better-informed public will pay attention to what happens in Copenhagen this December. A better-informed public is likelier to accept – even insist upon – meaningful government measures being enacted in order to address climate change. That in itself could lead to effective, long-lasting change, and that’s just what we need. Finally, some members of the public will join the organizations that are teaching them about climate change, bringing the world closer to the critical mass of people needed to shoulder the load.
Answer: EDUCATION.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Truly, There's Nothing to be Afraid of

February 26, 2013 – The 1960s scared conservatives worse than I knew – worse than a lot of us knew, I guess.   Certainly I lived through that period.   Certainly young adults found their voices, and had the nerve to object to being put through the meat grinder called Vietnam.   Black Americans continued to seek justice and equality in their adopted homeland.   Change was inevitable.   It’s understandable that conservatives wanted a say in what those changes would be.   Their fearful reaction was – and is - badly overblown.   Others’ happiness is nothing to fear.     These longed-for changes cost conservatives nothing but their unearned, self-satisfied atrophy.   Young people went on dying, even so. It turns out all of that change scared the socks off market fundamentalists.   Determined to return the country to its previous perceived state of inertia, Lewis Powell wrote a memorandum for the US Chamber of Commerce, urging a sh...

A Rock and a Hard Place

October 8, 2012 - Such a pickle: we have the coal, but no longer want to burn it.  China wants the coal, but shouldn't burn it because of the resulting air pollution.  Coal mining companies in the U.S. are ready and waiting to ship their coal to China.  Citizens of the U.S. living on its west coast are adamant they want nothing to do with exporting coal.  That includes Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber.  Kitzhaber's April 25 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expresses his profound skepticism about shipping coal by way of Oregon's ports.  He has requested that a programatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) first be conducted for all five of the export projects currently being considered, as well as a comprehensive policy review.  Here is part of a press release announcing his letter: "I have concerns about proceeding in this direction [exporting coal to China via Oregon ports] in the absence of a full national discussion about the ramif...