![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Wednesday's child is full of woe
Aug. 25th, 2021 08:54 pm***
Right, in today's theme of 'Carpe Diem: A Week of Creativity and Squee' my offerings are...
Third instalment of the ridiculous Craig/Bruno drabble sequence, referencing maybe one of my favourite scenes from the series.
For the Squee prompt, a cause I'm passionate about... Okay. Deep breath.
***
***
CLIMATE CHANGE IS A CRIME AND WE ARE ALL VICTIMS. GET BIG MAD ABOUT IT.
This year in particular (better late than never I guess) there's been a lot of things in the news about climate change and chances are high that you've encountered at least one article or social media post that tells you what you, as an individual, can do to save the planet you've been destroying. We should all fly less, recycle more, put solar panels on our houses and become vegan. Are you doing your part? Are you feeling guilty yet? Click here to learn how *insert company name* is combating climate change. Listen here as *insert politician name* explains how *insert country name* is world-leading in renewable energy and *sustainable practice wild card* with a straight face while pocketing some coal-dust covered donation money.
And listen, I'm definitely in favour of everyone making sustainable choices in their consumption where they can, absolutely, but the fact of the matter is that climate change is not caused because you left the lights on by accident last night or because I fly to see my family 1-3 times a year and it SURE AS FUCK ISN'T GOING TO BE SOLVED IF WE STOP DOING THOSE THINGS.
What we have here is a classic diversion tactic of shifting the focus and responsibility onto individuals and away from, wait for it... transnational corporations (particularly, especially, principally the fossil fuel industry) and governments, who in collusion have engaged in what amounts to state-corporate crime, structural violence, crime against humanity/ecocide, ecologically induced genocide to throw out some terms, the definitions of which would fit like an oil-slick glove.
But Kat, isn't crime a social construct that has no objective standard or ontological reality? Isn't it just a label that depends on the social, cultural, political and historical context? Correct-a-mundo my friend! It absolutely would be more meaningful to talk about the harmful consequences of actions, rather than their strict legality (especially as vast majority of climate change causing corporate/government action is perfectly legal. Although, maybe not forever, maybe not for too long). In other words, the harm doesn't need to be the intention, and indeed the harm of climate change is not the intention but a by-product of profit-making activities (making it, in some parlance, a crime of capitalism but that's another rant).
However, labelling some acts contributing to climate change/other environmental harm as crimes, whilst not straightforward, draws the necessary attention to the issue of blameworthiness.
What do you mean by blameworthiness, Kat? A good fucking question. By that I mean that we need to consider actions in terms of
1) contribution to the problem - In terms of climate change, one might for example point out this analysis of 90 leading oil, gas, coal and cement investor-owned, state-owned and nation state producers which showed that between 1854 and 2010 they were responsible for 63% of cumulative CO2 and methane emissions worldwide. Or this report on the 100 companies responsible for 71% of greenhouse gas emissions (also nice visualisation here)
2) foreknowledge - You know how it's manslaughter if you kill someone by reckless driving but murder if you aim your car at them on purpose and fucking floor it? Well, the fossil fuel industry has demonstrably known about the effects of its activities for over sixty years and its campaign to deceive and obfuscate the issue of climate change by persuading the public that science was conflicting or outright wrong and denying human responsibility is organised, deliberate, well-funded and ongoing, utilizing many of the public relations strategies tried and tested by the Big Tobacco (Smoke and Fumes is an excellent website with primary sources uploaded and I would also recommend these to two reports from the Union of Concerned Scientists: 2007; 2014)
Big mad? Things to do:
- Get knowledged up my good folk. I've tried to pick open access articles/links for above but if there's something you want to read but can't or you want more academic sources (including an encyclopedia entry I wrote on this very fucking thing) pm me, open access is a right. Would also recommend DeSmog
- Call TNCs and governments out on social media, i.e. DRAG THEM and elsewhere when the opportunity arises (I once made a loud and public observation about Shell's human rights record in a middle of a high street in front of their stand)
- Take them to court! Or, more realistically, support campaigns for legal action. There's been some recent success with that (e.g. Shell is not having a good year at all - couldn't happen to a nicer company) - also, worth keeping an eye on how the campaign to add ecocide (back! it was originally there) to the Rome Statute / give it other legal standing is going. Check both international (e.g. Green Peace) or local environmental campaigns and organisations regarding this
- Hit them where it hurts, i.e. money and reputation. The campaigns to deinvest from fossil fuels are growing and this year, after the lurid front page images of the world literally on fire, even the more staunchly neoliberal financial organisations are getting antsy about their public image. Again, check what's happening locally (start e.g. here and for UK and if you want something to get angry about re Johnson's government, google thee 'Cambo oil field'). If you happen to work for an organisation that has an investment portfolio, why not start asking awkward questions about how ethical that portfolio is.
Right. I think that's enough ranting for today...
***
