Beyond Copenhagen
Posted by dvd on 09 Jul 2009 at 02:44 pm | Tagged as: act local, climate chaos
It has become obvious from recent press releases, campaigns and actions that the environmental movement has started to focus on the upcoming Copenhagen Climate Change Conference in December 2009 (COP15). The rallying cry is that this is the last opportunity world governments will have to agree to start reducing greenhouse gas emissions and cut these massively over the next few decades – beyond this, they say, governments and nations have little chance of accomplishing the cuts necessary to avoid disastrous tipping points in the earth’s warming climate system. So all hopes have been pinned on politicians and governments at this conference for saving the earth on our behalf. But there are several dangers in pursuing this logic that could ultimately lead to the very thing the movement is trying to prevent.
The first danger is that despite the outcome of the talks, whether positive, neutral or negative, it is likely there will be a ‘demobilisation’ across the environmental movement. An article at The Change Agency elaborates on the results of an apparent failure:
If the second or third post COP ‘Outcome’ outlined above come to pass, the Australian (this article focuses on the Australian movement, but is applicable globally) climate movement’s may find itself in what could be called a ‘Perception of Failure’ stage. This is often cited as a ‘Stage 5’ following a movement ‘take-off’ period’ and often seen to be preceding a period of mainstream acceptance of movement goals.[4]
According to Moyer, the characteristics inherent in this stage include: the widely held belief amongst movement activists that its goals remain un-achieved and power-holders remain unchallenged. Numbers are down at demonstrations as people feel that repetitive and formulaic actions are ineffective. Despair, hopelessness, burnout, dropout are common, membership, particularity active membership of groups declines. Numbers of ‘negative rebels’, those activists willing to take high risk actions without movement support emerge and garner negative public attention, which further alienates concerned people.
Paradoxically, the results of an apparent ‘success’ are also undesirable:
Deliberate movement co-option and demobilisation may not be the intention of the Copenhagen Conference of Parties and the climate negotiations process in itself. But the dynamic is what the movement needs to be aware of and respond to. Elites are practised in providing outwardly impressive policy statements with little substance or which hide covert practises. Elite groups also have the advantage of influence over powerful communication channels. Many, if not all, national delegations at Copenhagen will be seeking the most politically profitable outcome at the conference and the appeasement of their domestic climate movements will be a part of their considerations. Whilst it is likely that experienced climate activists and lobbyists, already well versed in climate negotiation politics will be able to perceive duplicity in the COP outcomes, less engaged activists and the concerned public will be more likely to adopt the predominate messaging received via mainstream media.
…
If COP results in something like Outcome 1 described above, even dedicated climate activists who already regularly attend movement events may find themselves wondering if all the effort is worth it now that the US, alongside the rest of the world have come on board and started to turn things around. Surely the thing now is to sit back and see how the international targets are met? Those people, who are looking for a reason not to come to the next rally, may well find one after COP.
The result either way, whether or not serious cuts are agreed on a sensible time scale, will likely results in large-scale demobilisation of the environmental movements. By setting such a definitive deadline, either they will feel so successful that they’ve done the job and need do no more for the earth, or so defeated and depressed that further action seems pointless. Either way, the total focus on the results of this conference could torpedo future efforts in preventing climate chaos.
The second danger of the Copenhagen logic is the growing reliance on high-up elites to solve the climate crisis for us. As the timings of these talks has been identified as so crucial by the various organisations and groups of the environmental movement, there has been a massive shift to the line of thinking that only #they# can make the difference needed – the politicians, leaders and elites. However, as it is these people’s jobs to maintain the status quo, to keep our modern industrial economies running as smoothly and profitably as possible and to facilitate the liquidation of the earth’s natural capital to finance these economies, it is inevitable that even with a ‘positive’ outcome of serious cuts that these promises will contain extensive loopholes, flexibility and wriggle room covered up by dense greenwash language. I have no doubt that communiques from the gathered politicians, that have been pored over by PR reps in order to maximise greenwash, will claim a victory nonetheless, whether or not their promised cuts will make a difference or not. Indeed, to expect anything more from these talks is naive. Minor progress may well be made, but enough to finally turn around the battle against impending climate chaos? Unlikely.
This potential ‘perception of success’ poses differing challenges to the current climate movement. In a similar way to the movement’s downturn in the months following the election of the Rudd government and the symbolic signing of the Kyoto Pact, people, lobbyists and NGO leadership groups, can be deceived by an apparent successful political compromise. The belief that politicians hold the strings of capital and can make the structural shifts actually necessary to halt runaway climate change is mainstream and ubiquitous. This feeds directly into the commonly held belief that elites are essentially powerful and popular movements (and their activities) are not.
What will happen is that the cultural concept of dependence on the leaders, politicians and elites to take action for us and look after us for our best good will become further entrenched. The existing system will fail to be challenged by those who run it and depend on it for wealth and power, and so will continue to wreak havoc and create climate chaos. The push for changing our destructive western lifestyles will fall by the wayside, and attempts to overthrow the destructive culture behind it will falter.
As long as we believe it’s their job to fix this, all will be lost. But as soon as we accept that our leaders and elites are incapable of doing enough to stop climate chaos, then there is a chance. If we instead focus on overthrowing the destructive culture they and we are embedded into, abandoning consumerist lifestyles and stopping infinite economic growth, we have a hugely better chance of stopping the juggernaught of industrial economy before it breaks the 2C tipping point. Through local economies, local currencies, local food production, extensive permaculture, stronger communities and cultural subversion we can make a difference. We have to see beyond Copenhagen and its result either way – it’s time to focus on the real action each of us can achieve that’s infinitely more valuable than the greenwashed communiques of Copenhagen.
What a silly piece! Those of us who know we went past the tipping point decades ago still feel there is lots to do….to accommodate refugees, in palliative care, and to face the horrors of cannibalism and worse, whatever that may be. Goofy greens–who think that the tipping point will be a conjunction of environmental measurements, rather than it having been a sociological event we passed decades ago (as warned by Limits to Growth)–cling to a desperate delusion about still being in control.
The public’s attention is always fickle and hypocritical. Politic politicos sell 2% solutions and then everybody pretends we are doing something.
Give your head a shake! Open up the window and let the bad air out.
The main point of this article was that the current strategy of the environmental movement of pinning all hopes on politicians is doomed, and that focusing on our own efforts to dismantle the current system is much more important. Even if we have passed the tipping point for the climate system, the existing culture still needs to be torn down and replaced (if not more urgently) to limit further impacts from our emissions. Whilst I’m definitely not optimistic like many green commentators on the tipping point issue, I’m not convinced on if it’s completely passed us by or not. What I am convinced by is that either way emissions need to be cut, the focus on the Copenhagen is misplaced, and reliance on politicians is dangerous. There is lots to do, including all the things mentioned at the end of my article that are useful in either scenario and complement your suggestions. I think we can both agree that Copenhagen is a distraction constructed by our untrustworthy elites!