麻豆社事件

1. High Care Low Carbon Love

At an election meeting with some fellow climate orgs a few weeks ago, I played the role of green grouch. There was some suggestion that our upcoming federal election would be all about justice and fairness and compassion. I would love for that to be the case, but I spend too much time reading Facebook comments (don鈥檛!) to harbor any belief that voters would be motivated by justice. And with a few weeks to go, and聽, I fear I鈥檓 right.

Last week I heard . She summarized Joe Biden鈥檚 plan for America thus: . It鈥檚 so beautiful. So simple. But do those words translate to something people can vote for? I鈥檓 not sure. I鈥檝e taken to thinking of our current federal election mindset here in Canada as 鈥減rotect your core.鈥� When people feel threatened, they huddle up and tighten their abs, even if, when at ease, they very much care about things that are high care and low carbon, and low carb. It鈥檚 just that you can鈥檛 devote attention to those things when your core feels vulnerable. And with COVID, housing unaffordability, and myriad other fears jockeying for top berth, attention is going to the gut. It鈥檚 literal protectionism.

The key is to remember that even when climate is a key voting issue (and it is, according to current polling!) it isn鈥檛 a primal voting issue. Putting too much stock in climate concern will result in massive disappointment on election days. Again, not because people don鈥檛 care, but because a loaf of bread is a thing you can need more immediately and palpably than a building retrofit. This just means we need to design a world where people can have their bread and green it too.

---

2. Fake Norms Can Lose

麻豆社事件 people are climate-concerned than not. 麻豆社事件 people want to take action than don鈥檛. And that trend is increasing by the millisecond. Which is why climate headlines that don鈥檛 emphasize these norms are bogus. To wit, this Globe and Mail fail:

As a journalistic outlet, you could say that objectivity should be the overriding goal, and that both a headline highlighting the negatives or the positives would be fair in the case of this data. But if the goal of journalism is to share relevant information, the relevant information here is that the majority preference for climate action is growing with every poll. Which is why highlighting a persistent but unchanging minority opinion just seems like bad journalism. As the climate-concerned, it鈥檚 our job to call this in when we see it because descriptive norms are wildly powerful. 

In the most famous behavioral science example, the , Robert Cialdini illustrated how amplifying bad behavior encourages people to behave accordingly. Telling people that far too many people had taken treasures from the petrified forest actually encouraged more people to steal wood. Despite the fact that this is not normative behavior and most people don鈥檛 steal. In other words, highlighting something amplifies its normative power. Which is why stressing that some people still don鈥檛 care about climate change is just stupidly unhelpful. 

(The cool thing is a few tweets was all it took for the Globe to rewrite its headline!)

---

3. Climate Anxiety: New Words for a New World

This piece on the language of climate anxiety in YES! is so good. It talks about how the term climate anxiety is both amorphous and very White. Climate anxiety in this context is about sadness, when for many people, especially those at the forefront of climate effects in other parts of the world, climate anxiety is about anger.

As the article explains:

鈥淓xperts in a variety of fields, from science communication to the health effects of climate change, argue that this buzzword misses the complexity of the phenomenon. By painting the psychological experience of climate change in such broad strokes, it inevitably excludes marginalized voices. Instead, they鈥檙e calling for a more nuanced  of climate change and mental health鈥攐ne that decenters the experiences of White, wealthy communities.

鈥溾�業t鈥檚 actually just a perpetuation of colonialism,鈥� Barnwell says. 鈥楤y individualizing distress, we miss what is politically happening around the world to various communities.鈥欌��

I love the new lexicon proposed by Australian professor Glenn Albrecht in his forthcoming book. Words like 鈥渢ierrafurie,鈥� the extreme anger one feels at the destruction wrought by an industrial-technological society. Albrecht also coined solastalgia, a word I鈥檝e long loved, which describes the feeling of love and distress we feel at the experience of climate-changed landscapes.

---

4. I Don鈥檛 Really Have a Four, But Lists Need to Come in Threes or Fives, So Here鈥檚 a Doodle of a Deconstructed Watermelon

---

5. The Carbon Coffee Klatch

I practice lots, and still I royally eff up 53% of all climate conversations I have (Hello, telling my brother-in-law that his fancy artisanal meat from a swish Montreal butcher still didn鈥檛 reflect the social cost of carbon. Why?). Like Chopin, carbon convos require a delicate touch, a romantic disposition, and hours of practice. When we come together to talk climate, there鈥檚 an added benefit: release. At , people chat, grieve, and imbibe.

From :

鈥淜ilmer said she was astonished by how good she felt at the end of the first climate cafe she attended. 鈥楨ven though I had shed a lot of tears, and gotten in touch with some powerful feelings, there was a sense of relief that I could share that with somebody,鈥� she said.鈥�

Indeed. We鈥檙e afraid to talk. But talking unlocks so much. And makes us better talkers. This is the impetus for two initiatives that I hope are worthy of your time:

Talk Climate to Me

Our collaborative climate course is now open for registration. It鈥檚 an online experience for women-identifying people in Ontario (though no one will be turned away!). We promise a joyful series of talks and creative exercises to help you gain confidence and find climate community. .

This Week:

What鈥檚 up? Are you focused or fractured? Got a climate neologism? Had a good or horrid climate convo? As always, let me know!

Last Week: 

I got so much feedback. Turns out being a judgy grump is a liiiitle bit relatable, ha. Lots of wisdom, thank you, thank you! Love this bit of behavioral science on how we are not the best judges of others鈥� judgment. Thanks Nathan! 

Nathan writes: 鈥淚n terms of what people actually hate in terms of preachiness, I thought this  was pretty amazing鈥攊t found that religious people (obvious parallel with climate activists?) tend to assume nonreligious people will hate them praying in public and be grateful to be told about their religion or invited to pray together, when actually it鈥檚 completely the reverse鈥� At the very least, we aren鈥檛 the first group who鈥檚 had an unpopular message we think would save everyone. Maybe we just have to own our culty weirdness, maybe with more public 鈥榩raying鈥� at the margins?鈥�

People Dancing

Go shawtea 馃拋鈥嶁檧锔� @mal0si.scanlan

Thanks so much for reading. If you like MVP, please subscribe or share. If you hate it, let me know so I can make it better. Hope you are healthy and happy and safe.

Have a lovely weekend,
Sarah

P.S. This is my newsletter for the week of Sept. 10, 2021, published in partnership with YES! 麻豆社事件. You can sign up to get Minimum Viable Planet newsletter emailed directly to you at .