BY: MEL FERLISE
Mel Ferlise is a first year Masters of International Relations student at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Bologna Italy. Their focus is Climate, Development and Sustainability in Asia with a specific interest in International Disaster Management mitigation and adaptation. They also are a passionate advocate for LGBTQ+ rights, women's rights and refugees.
Introduction
Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. While global recognition of and action against it are lagging, climate change is slowly but inescapably becoming an existential threat to humanity. But how did we get here? We are living in the so-called Anthropocene, a period defined by human impact on the climate and ecosystems often linked to industrialization and capitalism. Within the current system, catastrophic consequences of climate change and environmental degradation are inevitable. In addition, this system feeds into itself through structural violence such as toxic masculinity and racism that insidiously contribute to the climate crisis. In order to mitigate and adapt, there needs to be a societal shift towards a climate-conscious epoch. A capitalist-centered perspective will not lead us to the sustainable transition needed in order to mitigate and adapt to climate change. For a green transition to be effective, there must be a shift towards empathy and creating structural equity with respect for every human and nonhuman life. Indigenous practices and perspectives can guide us to help deconstruct the current system and create a new era marked by justice and synergy with the environment. The road to a sustainable future will not be straightforward and the deconstruction of these harmful systems will be onerous, but crucial.
The Current Era: Inherent Destruction
Anthropocene’s defining characteristic is mankind’s “significant — and potentially intelligent — force capable of reshaping the face of the planet.”[1] This era has been driven by an industrialized, capitalist, and consumerist culture. The focus on consumption has led to unsustainable practices such as burning coal and fossil fuels and creating excessive waste which has significantly altered the global environment. The Anthropocene characterizes humankind as directly responsible for the changing climate. In giving humanity this level of power, it can be argued that humanity also has the capacity to reverse these impacts and create a more sustainable future. However, it is necessary to introduce a new human era in order to make these changes, as the current societal systems, based on rampant consumerism, patriarchy and structural racism, are incompatible with a sustainable future.
Climate Change: Societal Upheaval
The impacts of climate change threaten every aspect of society. As struggles over more and more scarce resources will be a central theme in a climate changed world, the security of states and people is inherently at stake.[2] Issues directly linked to climate change, such as sea level rise or an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters, further threaten national security. Our current conceptualization of security does not allow for proactive and transformative change because it separates humanity from nature, thereby creating a dualism which is difficult to overcome. Solutions always focus on an “escape to an outside” without recognizing that humanity and nature are inherently linked.[3] This exemplifies the broader issue of needing to reframe societal understanding of and approaches to climate change.
With such an existential and universal threat, it is hard to understand the absence of more drastic measures to prevent further climate disasters. However, climate change is linked to other forms of structural violence that shape today's society. By calling society to recognize and change these structures, we are also asking for those with power and privilege to relinquish their positions. In other words, a complete breakdown of the current social order.
The impacts of climate change are most recognizable in marginalized communities. Therefore, the recognition of these communities is required in order to address it. By admitting that climate change is a prevailing threat, one must recognize how systemic oppression and inequality have led to it. The adverse impacts of capitalist societies have been felt by marginalized communities for generations, but only recently have they become more widely recognized. Communities such as Curtis Bay in Baltimore, Maryland have been suffering for decades. Despite a changing industrial sector and power generation sources, “locals have long learned to accept pollution as a condition of survival in their community.” [5] The polluting industries that are feeding climate change are placed in neighborhoods where the health and lifestyle of those who live there are deemed less important due to their socioeconomic status. In order to mitigate climate change, we must also deconstruct the oppressive systems that have allowed for its perpetuation. One could argue that the behaviors that have created climate change would not exist without structural inequalities such as racism or patriarchy. Therefore, in order to properly address climate change, these systems must also be deconstructed. Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor, by Rob Nixon, articulates the ways in which racial and socioeconomic discrimination are connected to climate change:
Discrimination predates disaster: in failures to maintain protective infrastructures, failures at pre-emergency hazard mitigation, failures to maintain infrastructure, failures to organize evacuation plans for those who lack private transport, all of which make the poor and racial minorities disproportionately vulnerable to catastrophe.[4]
Toxic Masculinity and Climate Change
The intricate links between the current social order and climate change becomes clear when examining the relationship between toxic masculinity and the fossil fuel industry. Cara Dagget introduced the concept of petro-masculinity, referring to how, “fossil fuel extraction and consumption can function as a performance of masculinity.”[8] The concept relates fossil fuels to overconsumption, climate denial, patriarchy, and racism. Dagget states that the extraction and use of fossil fuels have become part of the white American masculine identity, “the American way of life was centered around a version of white, patriarchal rule in which the achievement of hegemonic masculinity required intensive fossil fuel consumption and, for the working- or middle-class, jobs within or reliant upon fossil fuel systems.”[9] The relationship of hegemonic masculinity defines what it means to be a man in American society and connects climate denial to the perpetuation of violence. The trend of rolling coal, (modifying cars to intentionally spew large amounts of diesel exhaust) is both a display of masculinity and an anti-environmentalist statement that further illuminates this link. It is perceived as “unmanly” to drive an electric vehicle, recycle or engage in other sustainable practices. Admitting the existence of the climate crisis implies the need to change damaging behaviors to the environment, but these damaging behaviors constitute a foundational pillar for a masculine identity. Those with the most power in society, cis-gendered white men, are able to maintain their position of privilege through fossil fuel consumption, consuming to excess to the detriment of vulnerable communities. The impacts of climate change are least felt among the most privileged in society and therefore they feel free to continue this behavior. This shows the incompatibility between sustainable practices and patriarchy. To root out the causes of climate change, society needs to shift away from these structures that perpetuate violence.
Overcoming Dualism: Indigenous Voices
Within the Anthropocene, humanity is seen as above nature and by this separation, we fail to see the ways in which nature can teach us the way forward. Despite the current dominance of Western, capitalist, secular nations incompatible with a sustainable future, small geopolitical shifts are happening, such as the embrace of indigenous voices in the sphere of international environmental law. Indigenous communities are some of the most affected by climate change, even though their contributions to global warming have been negligent compared to that of highly industrialized nation-states. Marjo Lindroth and Heidi Sinevaara-Niskanen, professors from the University of Lapland, explain how indigenous communities are gaining autonomy in international environmental politics. Through the creation of organizations such as the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Arctic Council, indigenous communities are gaining a space to share their grievances as well as their knowledge. “Indigenous peoples have local and traditional knowledge of their environments (...) they are stakeholders who live in areas affected by climate change and thus have a need to adapt to the changes in their daily life.”[10] There is a perception that indigenous peoples have a closer relationship to nature as their livelihoods and cultural practices are closer connected to nature. Lindroth and Niskanen caution against essentializing all indigenous beliefs and practices as being cohesive with sustainability, but recognize that many indigenous activists are asking to be heard and eager to share invaluable knowledge that can help shift societies' perspective on how to address climate change.
Robin Kimmerer, a botanist and member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, is one such activist who believes in the importance of listening to nature and the importance of indigenous beliefs as an avenue to embrace a more sustainable global society. Kimmerer explains the various ways in which her indigenous culture has connected her to nature and informed her scientific career. Her work shows that there does not need to be a separation between humanity and nature and that these two worlds can help and inform one another. Her work proves that humans' interaction with nature is not intrinsically destructive and warrants further exploration into how humankind can foster a closer relationship with it. Indigenous practices can inform sustainable growing and harvesting techniques. The common cultural respect for nature can shift the global mindset which currently views nature as subordinated to humankind, thus fuelling its destruction. Kimmerer emphasizes the importance of taking time to reflect on the sources that each possession comes from, “Slow down— it’s thirty years of a tree’s life you’ve got in your hands there. Don’t you owe it a few minutes to think about what you’ll do with it?”[13] If this type of viewpoint sinks into the global consciousness, it is possible that we can overcome issues such as overconsumption, waste, and environmental degradation. This shift in mindset towards more empathy and unity with nature is required for an effective change to occur. If the will of the people does not align with the protection of the planet and the cultivation of a better relationship with nature, then the ability to properly mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change remains bleak.
Conclusion
The separation of humanity and nature in the Anthropocene does a disservice to our ability to properly combat climate change. It is necessary to move away from the Anthropocene and embrace radical societal change to effectively address the climate crisis. The pervasive nature of the climate crisis is shown in its interconnectedness with different forms of oppression such as racism and patriarchy. Looking towards diverse perspectives and that of those who are most impacted by climate change paves the way for progressive change. Humanity must find the courage to reject the structures that have perpetuated climate disaster and instead move the world into a climate-centered epoch. This perspective is necessary to guide us to a just transition.
[1] Fagan, Madeleine. “Security in the Anthropocene: Environment, Ecology, Escape.” European Journal of International Relations 23, no. 2 (2016): 292–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066116639738.
[2] Fagan, “Security in the Anthropocene”
[3] Fagan, “Security in the Anthropocene”
[4] Rob Nixon, Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011. Accessed November 10, 2023. ProQuest Ebook Central, 59.
[5] Chloe Ahmann, “‘It’s Exhausting to Create an Event out of Nothing’: Slow Violence and the Manipulation of Time,” Cultural Anthropology 33, no. 1 (2018): 142–71, https://doi.org/10.14506/ca33.1.06, 159.
[6] Nixon, Environmentalism of the Poor, 152
[7] Kristy Campion, “Defining Ecofascism: Historical Foundations and Contemporary Interpretations in the Extreme Right,” Terrorism and Political Violence 35, no. 4 (2021): 926–44, https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2021.1987895, 927.
[8] Cara Daggett, “Petro-Masculinity: Fossil Fuels and Authoritarian Desire,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 47, no. 1 (2018): 25–44, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829818775817.
[9] Daggett, “Petro-Masculinity”
[10] Marjo Lindroth and Heidi Sinevaara-Niskanen, “At the Crossroads of Autonomy and Essentialism: Indigenous Peoples in International Environmental Politics,” International Political Sociology 7, no. 3 (2013): 275–93, https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12023, 288.
[11] Robin Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass : Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. Minneapolis: Milkweed Editions, 2013. Accessed November 10, 2023. ProQuest Ebook Central, 124.
[12] Kimmerer, “Braiding Sweetgrass,” 163.
[13] Kimmerer, “Braiding Sweetgrass,” 155.
Photo: “Golden Inle Lake” Kojun Nakashima (part of 2021 Photo Contest)