Greta is great example of youth leading change, as is Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, who is an advocate, leader, activist and hiphop artist. https://www.earthguardians.org/xiuhtezcatl
Also, I would like to note one other principle that we can take away from the Movement and particularly from the Birmingham Children's Crusades and that is the power of youth to bravely create change. When adults may be fearful, overly pragmatic or even just stuck in their ways, young activists can stand up and rise to the challenge. They can overfill jails to fight Bull Connor and segregated Birmingham. They can face biting police dogs and rise up after being knocked down by the power of fire hoses. They can sing louder after being mistreated and beaten by jailers. Youth have a phenomenal ability to face obstacles with innovation and courage. Let's not rely on young people to do the work for us but we should amplify their voices and encourage them to lead the charge on creating a more environmentally responsible and forward thinking society.
This piece directly addresses such a huge problem with how we are approaching many if not all social, political and moral issues of the day. It is and always has been an issue for youth too. It is the reason the Greek system exists (to create and us and them scenario) and "othering" is an age old problem with students of all ages. It helps to know that I am not the only observer of (and sadly, even sometimes a participant in) polarization. I believe that it is impossible for us to find solutions, work towards creating change, or accomplish meaningful necessary milestones collectively if we cannot find common ground from which to start this work.
I would like to note that during the Civil Rights Movement (and even now when it is taught via an oversimplified approach) is often looked at as a dichotomy of approaches to fighting segregation and inequality. Most often people teach it through the lense of a Master Narrative which emphasizes two styles of leadership and action, nonviolence vs. violence (also taught as Dr. King vs. Malcolm X). But the Movement went so far beyond that. It wasn't ever that simple actually. To be more accurate, it could be stated that the two schools of thought (both of which were working towards the same end of equal rights) would be nonviolence vs. self-defense. Truth be told, the only reason these theories are taught this way is that during the Movement, I imagine people thought it would break down its strength by pitting one leader against another, regardless of their common goals. White segregationists were trying to polarize people fighting for the same cause to minimize their capacity to create change. I think this speaks to where we are today, as well. If we cannot learn to establish common goals and work towards them together, instead of alienating each other from conversations and planning sessions, then we will never make headway in alleviating climate change. We should all have the same goal, but the question is how can we get everyone to see that our goals are aligned? The work of achieving those goals cannot begin until we do. King and Malcolm X recognized that and therefore decided not to tear each other down but instead to lift each other up. We need to use that same approach. As Peter mentions below, it is much messier and more challenging to create inclusive communities than it is to work in silos but there is strength in unity and the most effective way to resolve issues that affect us all, are to come together and work towards our common goal of keeping the earth healthy and our resources from diminishing as long possible. There is nothing to be gained from assigning blame or determining fault. The only way to make gains is for all of us to do our part, on various levels to step up.
I would like to highlight that there were many brilliant thought leaders outside of King and Malcolm X, who had so much wisdom to share. John Lewis, of blessed memory, is one of those exceptional leaders. He knew, as James Lawson and Bayard Rustin did, that nonviolence wasn't just a means to an end, it is a way of life. Similarly, being more thoughtful about our consumerism, our footprint and making sustainable choices are that same way. They should be part of our ethos and our a way of life, not just an issue for politicians and business leaders to dispute. Finally, just as racism and ending segregation were/are not a political issue, but rather are a moral issue, so too is it a moral issue that we take responsibility for our earth, as it is the only one we have.
Thank you for your writing. I believe that climate change is a fundamentally a cultural issue rather than a rights and wrongs issue. Its about developing a narrative about change, positive change about the way we live today from a social and cultural perspective and articulating the benefits of a new cultural shift, which is to begin to live within the new climate paradigm. This means adapting and improving our living conditions (think planning for climate resilience), improving our productive practices (think products, innovation and technology) and improving our social relations (think sustainable communities, business relations and education and equality). Effective and responsible resource management (planet, natural resources and their uses) is critical to the to transitioning to new paradigm. Ultimately it is about engaging in climate conversations, taking action at community and political levels and developing awareness of everyday behavior and how it influences our impact on the 'climate dial'. Unfortunately, the urgency of this issue is not yet apparent among the general population, beyond those most directly affected. In the absence of a coherent communications campaign, this cultural shift will be slow and and therefore change will be more painful, costly and unequal across the globe. Despite my concerns expressed here I do believe that it is possible to shift the dial and that human behavior can and will change. The Covid experience has demonstrated that we can make change rapidly if we are asked to through coherent messaging informed by sound behavioral and psychological understandings.
I may have mentioned this before, but community of exclusion is the easiest, and therefore most often default mode for humans, because it allows us to forge, and perpetuate, group identity and cohesion with the least amount of effort by setting clear criteria for who is in and who is out.
By contrast, community of inclusion is difficult, messy, and requires personal awareness and interpersonal work that takes time, and that in Western dominant culture is neither taught, nor valued. This is without getting into critiques of Empire, which perpetuates the former at the cost of the latter form of community by its nature.
Agreed that for the climate movement, we cannot afford to have enemies. We are literally all in this together, and we are only going to get out of it by collaborating. No enemies means we can also start significantly de-investing military spending and plowing all that into all the things we need, battery/ energy storage/ carbon capture technologies, etc. along with reshaping our economies to be as local and sustainable as possible. Look at what Costa Rica accomplished abolishing their military and setting their ecosystem and community health & education as the higher values.
Greta is great example of youth leading change, as is Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, who is an advocate, leader, activist and hiphop artist. https://www.earthguardians.org/xiuhtezcatl
Also, I would like to note one other principle that we can take away from the Movement and particularly from the Birmingham Children's Crusades and that is the power of youth to bravely create change. When adults may be fearful, overly pragmatic or even just stuck in their ways, young activists can stand up and rise to the challenge. They can overfill jails to fight Bull Connor and segregated Birmingham. They can face biting police dogs and rise up after being knocked down by the power of fire hoses. They can sing louder after being mistreated and beaten by jailers. Youth have a phenomenal ability to face obstacles with innovation and courage. Let's not rely on young people to do the work for us but we should amplify their voices and encourage them to lead the charge on creating a more environmentally responsible and forward thinking society.
This piece directly addresses such a huge problem with how we are approaching many if not all social, political and moral issues of the day. It is and always has been an issue for youth too. It is the reason the Greek system exists (to create and us and them scenario) and "othering" is an age old problem with students of all ages. It helps to know that I am not the only observer of (and sadly, even sometimes a participant in) polarization. I believe that it is impossible for us to find solutions, work towards creating change, or accomplish meaningful necessary milestones collectively if we cannot find common ground from which to start this work.
I would like to note that during the Civil Rights Movement (and even now when it is taught via an oversimplified approach) is often looked at as a dichotomy of approaches to fighting segregation and inequality. Most often people teach it through the lense of a Master Narrative which emphasizes two styles of leadership and action, nonviolence vs. violence (also taught as Dr. King vs. Malcolm X). But the Movement went so far beyond that. It wasn't ever that simple actually. To be more accurate, it could be stated that the two schools of thought (both of which were working towards the same end of equal rights) would be nonviolence vs. self-defense. Truth be told, the only reason these theories are taught this way is that during the Movement, I imagine people thought it would break down its strength by pitting one leader against another, regardless of their common goals. White segregationists were trying to polarize people fighting for the same cause to minimize their capacity to create change. I think this speaks to where we are today, as well. If we cannot learn to establish common goals and work towards them together, instead of alienating each other from conversations and planning sessions, then we will never make headway in alleviating climate change. We should all have the same goal, but the question is how can we get everyone to see that our goals are aligned? The work of achieving those goals cannot begin until we do. King and Malcolm X recognized that and therefore decided not to tear each other down but instead to lift each other up. We need to use that same approach. As Peter mentions below, it is much messier and more challenging to create inclusive communities than it is to work in silos but there is strength in unity and the most effective way to resolve issues that affect us all, are to come together and work towards our common goal of keeping the earth healthy and our resources from diminishing as long possible. There is nothing to be gained from assigning blame or determining fault. The only way to make gains is for all of us to do our part, on various levels to step up.
I would like to highlight that there were many brilliant thought leaders outside of King and Malcolm X, who had so much wisdom to share. John Lewis, of blessed memory, is one of those exceptional leaders. He knew, as James Lawson and Bayard Rustin did, that nonviolence wasn't just a means to an end, it is a way of life. Similarly, being more thoughtful about our consumerism, our footprint and making sustainable choices are that same way. They should be part of our ethos and our a way of life, not just an issue for politicians and business leaders to dispute. Finally, just as racism and ending segregation were/are not a political issue, but rather are a moral issue, so too is it a moral issue that we take responsibility for our earth, as it is the only one we have.
Thank you for your writing. I believe that climate change is a fundamentally a cultural issue rather than a rights and wrongs issue. Its about developing a narrative about change, positive change about the way we live today from a social and cultural perspective and articulating the benefits of a new cultural shift, which is to begin to live within the new climate paradigm. This means adapting and improving our living conditions (think planning for climate resilience), improving our productive practices (think products, innovation and technology) and improving our social relations (think sustainable communities, business relations and education and equality). Effective and responsible resource management (planet, natural resources and their uses) is critical to the to transitioning to new paradigm. Ultimately it is about engaging in climate conversations, taking action at community and political levels and developing awareness of everyday behavior and how it influences our impact on the 'climate dial'. Unfortunately, the urgency of this issue is not yet apparent among the general population, beyond those most directly affected. In the absence of a coherent communications campaign, this cultural shift will be slow and and therefore change will be more painful, costly and unequal across the globe. Despite my concerns expressed here I do believe that it is possible to shift the dial and that human behavior can and will change. The Covid experience has demonstrated that we can make change rapidly if we are asked to through coherent messaging informed by sound behavioral and psychological understandings.
I may have mentioned this before, but community of exclusion is the easiest, and therefore most often default mode for humans, because it allows us to forge, and perpetuate, group identity and cohesion with the least amount of effort by setting clear criteria for who is in and who is out.
By contrast, community of inclusion is difficult, messy, and requires personal awareness and interpersonal work that takes time, and that in Western dominant culture is neither taught, nor valued. This is without getting into critiques of Empire, which perpetuates the former at the cost of the latter form of community by its nature.
Agreed that for the climate movement, we cannot afford to have enemies. We are literally all in this together, and we are only going to get out of it by collaborating. No enemies means we can also start significantly de-investing military spending and plowing all that into all the things we need, battery/ energy storage/ carbon capture technologies, etc. along with reshaping our economies to be as local and sustainable as possible. Look at what Costa Rica accomplished abolishing their military and setting their ecosystem and community health & education as the higher values.