Persuade the persuadables; activate the persuaded

The discussion that ensued on a recent post on global warming really made me immensely proud to be associated with most of the people who post on this site and their level of information and insight.

I post a lot on global warming, because it’s a massive crisis that affects literally everything. I think I’m speaking to a receptive audience, I want to keep it front and center of the political agenda, and I hope that I can get other people to also put it front-and-center in their political activity.

And so I wonder how worthwhile it is to argue in the comments with those folks who have already made up their minds that they will not believe that global warming is real — no matter the evidence, no matter what’s in front of their faces. They’re in denial; and I don’t really think a blog is an effective place for an “intervention.” Denial is a process of rationalization, not rationality. People’s egos get caught up in their political beliefs — perhaps you’ve noticed! — and to back down or reconsider publicly is just too damn humiliating.They may change their minds eventually, but it won’t be because someone on Blue Mass. Group showed them the silver-bullet fact that made it all make sense. If you’re a denier, by the time you’ve decided to post on this site, you’ve put on your gladiatorial armor and you’re up for a fight. A political warrior will not give an opponent the satisfaction of a victory if he or she can at all avoid it. That’s human nature.

But many, if not most Americans are persuadable. Insofar as going back-and-forth with denialists can force us to sharpen our arguments and gain knowledge and insight, it’s worthwhile. And if one responds to a denier with a mind to convince or inform a disinterested observer, eg. a lurker on the site, that can be quite worthwhile — and less frustrating. Those folks are out there. They know the climate is acting weird. They may not quite know why, or what they can do about it, or what kind of large-scale action is necessary.

I don’t actually believe that most Republican politicians are global warming denialists in their hearts-of-hearts. They may be cowards — as politicians usually are, indeed as they are supposed to be — but they’re not dumb. Scott Brown knows it’s real; Eric Cantor knows it’s real; Orrin Hatch knows it’s real — regardless of what these folks might say publicly. Aside from the truly loony Inhofes and Sensenbrenners, I’ll bet at least 1/2 of the GOP caucus knows it’s real. But they can’t say so. They’re cowed by the conservative political correctness of the moment — or simply riding a Tea Party wave to keep their power. (Or should I say, “position”, since they have no power that’s not given to them by the voters.)

But the political climate can change, as the real climate changes more obviously and radically. Now is the time to persuade the persuadables; and to move those who are already persuaded into action — be it writing letters, meeting neighbors or Congresspeople, working with organizations like 350.org, Citizens Climate Lobby, or myriad others. The persuasion will come as we identify climate preservation as the central work of our political lives.

The climate isn’t going to get better on its own. So we work and work, laying the groundwork and waiting for our moment when the public discussion suddenly turns our way. It’s going to happen, unfortunately because it has to.

Recommended by amberpaw, methuenprogressive.



Discuss

5 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. 32 Trillion hidden this year is part of the political climate problem

    First, here is the article claiming that the top 1% of the top 1% (you know, Romney’s type of sneaky predator elite) stashes 32 trillion off shore/outside of the countries where they actually live Again, that is 32 trillion. More than the entire economy of THIS country. Enough money to get Africa on its feet. Ensure that we take care of our own in this country not only as well as we once did – but as well as Dr. Martin Luther King thought we could and should do. What if those uber wealthy folks, who tell us “you people” don’t need to know how much money they have, figure they can live on islands they buy, under glass domes, terraform another planet with their slaves (who knows what they think?). But there is a great chart at that link about how much money Russian oligarchs stash outside of Russia to avoid taxes, the Red Meat Americans like Romney stash outside of the United States of America to welsh and avoid taxes, Korean billionaires stash outside of Korea (you get the picture). As to Rmoney putting his bain stock and stock options in a 401k, stating it had nominal value, and then seeing his 401k hold more than 100 million (surprise, it went public and gained value after being in the 401k) not to mention why should he tell us what he put in the Caymans…but again, this plays into the climate denial (at least in public) because if you can send trillions of dollars into hiding, maybe you believe your glass dome renders global warming irrelevant; insanity and greed and mammon worship take many forms. Again, 32 TRILLION dollars hidden every year would house a hell of a lot of homeless folks, treat a rather large number of aids patients, and render rather obvious the mean spirited bust down from living wages to peonage the evil shell game, the devilish sport of bent minds, obvious. Sometimes I have to wonder if the uber wealthy have actually sold their souls to the devil or something, the level of evil is so palpable.

  2. I am baffled as to the reasoning behind denier-ism.

    And yet I’m certain deniers are just baffled.
    Excellent site for dealing with flatearthers:

    http://grist.org/series/skeptics/

    [Here] is a complete listing of the articles in “How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic,” a series by Coby Beck containing responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming. There are four separate taxonomies; arguments are divided by:

    Stages of Denial,
    Scientific Topics,
    Types of Argument, and
    Levels of Sophistication.”

  3. It's not baffling...

    …when you think about the PR (propaganda) industry. A host of well-funded corporate front groups pump out endless disinformation. Not only do they provide fake “experts”, or shills, for the fossil fuel companies to appear in editorials, books, and news all over the world, they even pay liars-for-hire to post sockpuppet comments on blogs and news forums. Sometimes, when you are arguing with a denier, you are arguing with someone deluded by covert corporate propaganda. Sometimes, you are arguing someone online who is paid to deny, and will therefore never, ever come around. They use persona management software, that lets one paid “actor” post under multiple “personas.” This creates the classic propaganda technique of the bandwagon effect. Propaganda is the untold story behind the success of the right wing. If people knew, there would be a revolution tomorrow. Propaganda works.

    When the global robber barons have 32 TRILLION dollars stuffed in secret tax havens, you know the (relatively) small amount they pay to delude the public is investment well spent and represents a tiny fraction of their haul. What proportion of that 32 trillion is petro dollars? I wonder. We’ll be paying for their greed for an age. What they are doing is a monstrous evil, it is a crime against humanity, and we need to fight hard for a future we can survive.

  4. Bill McKibben gives us some global warming numbers here:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719

    Nay-sayers, avert your eyes.

  5. It's the activating the persuaded that still gives me trouble

    I don’t bother with Deniers; in my book, they’re right up there with Truthers and Birthers; “my mind is made up, so don’t try to confuse me with the facts.”

    I have my own hands full “activating the persuaded.” There are a lot, an awful lot, of die hard climate activists who shudder at the thought of political engagement. They’ve been let down and sold out too many times to have any vestigial faith in the system. Their president makes the odd murmur about climate change, but opens up new possibilities for drilling; ko’s the Keystone pipeline due primarily to objections from western ranchers, but is pleased as punch to announce alternate routes. Meanwhile, our candidate for Senate here in MA never so much as touches on the subject–and that’s been sticking in my craw from the get go. (Notice that Bob Massie was quoted in the McKibben article linked to above?).

    So: what’s working for you? How do you get those passionately interested in climate change (and peak oil) to continue with their Transition Town training and back-to-the-land endeavors to understand that without eventually affecting federal and state policy, which has created a playing field so skewed as to be laughable, their efforts,however noble, aren’t really going anywhere?

    It’s a serious question, because I’m not getting the job done.

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Sat 18 May 12:18 PM