Denialism: Is There a Threat?

Image from Vox

With the increasing attention climate change is gaining in the media and public consciousness, let's take a look at the phenomenon of climate change denial.

It appears that wherever a well-established scientific consensus exists, there always seem to be those who question or deny its validity: the moon landing, the HIV/AIDS epidemic, vaccinations and autism, and of course, climate change (the reason you're all reading). These are only some of the events and phenomena that have been the subjects of intense rejection and dubious theorisations. This is not exclusive to science; there are those who deny the consensus on large-scale terrorist attacks, genocides and tragedies (the Holocaust, 9/11 and the Sandy Hook Massacre are just the tip of the iceberg).

The human psyche has interesting ways of questioning information that, in this highly tech-heavy world, is so readily presented to it; some healthy scepticism is expected and in some cases, encouraged. But at which point does what is otherwise perceived to be critical thinking spiral out of control? I have seen many journalistic pieces suggesting our society is currently going through a widely dubbed 'Age of Denial', or at least experiencing a phase where people have become more suspicious of widespread information. This is based on the rapidly growing phenomenon where seemingly more and more people have begun to reject widely-accepted consensuses with such vehemence that they intellectualise and propagate alternate truths others would find far-fetched, offensive or both. The commitment to such an attitude has been named 'denialism'. In the case of climate change denial, it would not be a major concern if this form of denialism existed on a feeble scale. Much like the flat earth movement, the numbers would be negligible and its followers mocked for questioning a centuries-established concurrence. However, climate change denial is much trickier to tackle. A relatively new issue for the world to deal with, it is understandable that not everyone is convinced immediately. After all, global warming as a scientific term was only introduced in 1975, with the concern transitioning to climate change (then referred to as 'global change') as recently as the late 1980s. However, the individualistic culture of Western society rewards those possessing the loudest voices with a platform and following. Unlike the flat earth movement, there are powerful figures and corporations that harbour and strongly influence these beliefs, reaching a much larger audience. It is here that politics has an essential and dangerous part to play.

Image from Stray Notes

But who are the people denying the existence of climate change? The first person to come to mind is the ubiquitous Donald Trump. It seems nearly impossible to talk about climate change denial (or neglect) in politics without mentioning his name, yet this is not without reason. Since the US is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the world and also has one of the largest economies, you could argue that a chunk of the responsibility is in their hands. Since his inauguration as President of the United States, Donald Trump has pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement, proposed the passing of laws that put endangered species at further risk, and suggested climate scientists have a political agenda among many others. The presence of party members who feel similarly and the public's trust of them over scientists does no favours for climate activism. The US has the highest number of climate sceptics in the world, which is a massive obstacle to overcome if any notable progress is to be made.

But it does not begin and end with the American president. I have noticed that many of these conspiracies and public figures, often hypothesising that almost everything we know about climate change is a collective lie, are greatly influenced by large oil and gas corporations. It seems it is a common (if not regular) occurrence for these corporations to donate large sums of money to anyone willing to receive it, essentially wrapping them around their fingers. Just this year it was revealed that the fossil fuel industry outspent environmentalist and renewables groups by more than 10 times between 2000 and 2016; $2 billion was spent on influencing climate legislation in the US congress. With the knowledge of these companies proceeding to expand, in full knowledge of the damage they are inflicting, there appears to be no sign of slowing down.

WIth such power behind it, how do we tackle climate change denial? Touched on in one of my previous blog entries, political inactions and failed pledges around the world has reached the point where celebrities and private companies are taking action to spread awareness and encourage public participation. This is done with what I assume is the intention to reconcile the disconnect with a well known public figure or brand that will resonate more with the general public. However, it seems the desired effect is shortlived, as there now appears to be a backlash against celebrity and brand endorsement in the political sphere.

What do you think? Is there a way of tackling climate change denial, or do you think that denialism will always be a present issue?