I ran across this article recently and thought I’d post it for comment. Ms Solnit addresses what she considers “doomer evangelism”, and aims her criticism directly toward folks like me and others who might share my views. Although she makes some salient points, I regard most of her supporting assertions as not representative of my reaction to climate catastrophe. Not surprisingly, I take such misrepresentations personally and will take a moment to address one of these distortions.
Ms Solnit makes her thesis one that describes doomers as those who have surrendered in advance, do nothing to participate in efforts to achieve carbon neutrality, and who, by these actions, encourage others to do nothing. That is simply not true. Setting aside the fact that individual participation is a negligible activity, I’d posit that most doomers are already engaged in activities that support efforts to mitigate their own contribution to warming the planet.
I’ll point to myself as an example: I live in a rural northeastern US community, where mass transit is nonexistent. When I did live in a city, I used public transportation whenever I could. I drive a hybrid vehicle and have plans to purchase an EV as soon as I can. I engage in recycling and avail myself of the local composting program. I am deeply cognizant of my water and electricity usage and actively seek ways to limit that consumption. I limit my purchases of products that use single-use plastic by buying in bulk whenever possible. I buy local produce and meat whenever possible, almost exclusively during growing season. I support local, regional and national policies that encourage conservation of natural resources and those that limit the release of carbon into the atmosphere.
These efforts are expensive and consume a larger than average financial burden for me, especially considering that I am retired, and living on a nearly fixed income. I am doing everything I can possibly do on an individual level to contribute to a healthier planet. I know it’s not enough, and I recognize that larger societal and political realities prevent me from doing more. Yet, Ms Solnit would arrogantly declare my efforts to be settling for the worst outcome by doing nothing.
I have many more issues with Ms Solnit’s view which I haven’t the time or energy to presently address. Among them is her premise that my considerations are based on outdated research or misinformation. I’ll save that discussion for another day.
You must log in or register to comment.
She may be correctly characterizing a certain kind of doomer, but she doesn’t leave much room for nuance.
I don’t know how many doomers are like me, but there must be some. I’m a kind of “double doomer”.
The first has a selfishness about it and stems from getting nowhere for 50 years. What changes I’ve seen have been mostly the wrong kind. In 1974, Carol Burnett, on her variety show, had a little throwaway comment about curbing pollution during her sign off. We were at least trying to take pollution seriously back then and no longer do. In other words, I’m just tired.
The second stems from the realization that there is a tipping point nobody ever discusses, a societal tipping point. I’ve long realized that it takes society-wide change at a global scale to address such a massive global issue. Harking back to the early 1970s, I think we were on the cusp of a tipping point that would have led to several countries starting to do the necessary work by about 1980 and worldwide action by about 1990. Instead, we pulled back (or were pushed back) and we got Reagan and Thatcher demonstrating a different tipping point, one of denial and laziness. The resulting cascade led to what we have today. We’ve fallen far enough over the cliff as a society that clawing our way back cannot be done in time for that new society to take the necessary action.
I think she is right in one way. We do have the technological ability to address the problem. But, like most, she is completely missing the point that we’ve always had the technological ability to address the problem but have been, and continue to be, held back by countervailing social, political, and economic ideologies.
Actually, a third doomerism has started taking hold. Even assuming the right technology and global societal will, I’m no longer convinced that we actually have all the necessary natural and human resources. Even if we do, I’m not convinced we have enough time to deploy the necessary technology. Even factoring in the rapid pace of technological advances, I think c. 2010 was the cut-off. I can’t know whether there is a “black swan” technology over the horizon, but I am starting to think that the horizon is on the other side of the cliff.
