Waking the World for War Against Climate Change

By Anonymous / Winter 2021

A friend of mine loves his car. He cares for it as a parent would a child—it’s his pride and joy. Whether he’s taking out for a night drive or preparing for a race, he’s no happier than when he’s with his car. To satiate its powerful engine, my friend feeds it only quality gasoline and is always wary of rising gas prices. Naturally then, he’s become quite apprehensive about anything that might threaten his car, including modern climate policy. 

In conversation with me once, he pointed towards Seattle as proof that the Green New Deal was too potent a threat to his fuel source, arguing its policies were both an overstep and overreaction. Washington state had recently ended its smog check program, celebrating the state’s hard work in lowering emissions towards government targets. With this as his shining example, he credited modern fuel economy innovations, insisting that enough improvement had been made to prolong widespread reliance on gasoline. In his eyes, further attacks on gas cars would only alienate those unable to afford newer, cleaner vehicles and devastate families whose income depends on fossil fuel jobs. To him, politicians proposing these reforms seemed overly callous and willfully ignorant of the potential damage to their constituent’s livelihoods. Thus, no amount of scientific research would convince him to support policy he thought would be a death sentence for both his hobby and for those without the means to quickly adapt to clean energy. He saw America headed on a heartless path, and Seattle was supposed to be proof this didn’t have to be the case. 

In the midst of our debate I hesitated, unable to immediately refute the notion that proposed climate solutions could hurt American families. And then I remembered the burning air, the sirens, the panic as hundreds of families fled my neighborhood in wake of the Woolsey Fire. The smell of the soot that blanketed my room conjured before me, and memories of driving through my battered town came forth. What would he say to the families who had already been hurt, who’s homes had been destroyed in similar disasters? Global warming has taken no prisoners in its quest to lay waste to our planet. When the first plumes of industrial smoke filled the sky, it declared war on humanity. And in decades since, civilization has continued industrialization, strengthening our enemy as we continue to burn the very fuels that hasten the planet’s demise. Even as we consumers awaken to our role in this war, learning to recycle and carpool, what we can do alone is not enough. Instead, we must turn to the corporations, to those who continue to aid and abide global warming. 

This is how we must view the victory in Seattle. At first glance, the Emerald City’s triumph presents a massive win for the gas car. Vehicle emissions have lowered over the years, largely thanks to improvements in vehicle technology. Yet, looking more deeply reveals a different kind of success. Though fuel efficiency has improved, companies overly praise their minimal efforts in fixing an issue of their own creation. The same companies that now market their latest cleaner-energy fixes have spent decades prioritizing profit by stalling climate legislation and promoting pseudo-scientific views. Through commercial campaigns they tried passing the onus of saving our planet onto us consumers, even though they are responsible for an “astonishing 71%” of carbon emissions (Lukacs). Their continued inaction has only worsened our initiative in the war. Each year spent marketing against clean energy was a year of preparation lost. But in 2020, the retirement of Washington state’s smog check program ended a successful push to hold industries accountable. By mandating cleaner cars, the industry was forced to innovate and lend their efforts to the greater good. Their unwilling contributions are necessary ammunition to hold back the dangers of climate change—without them we risk floods and famine, and ultimately the demise of civilization. Coercing them into an alliance was a small victory—one that should have come sooner.  

If we are to win this war, we must understand how neoliberalism and corporate power have paralyzed our preparations. To do so, we must first recognize the history that has led us here. As we’ve seen, perpetual selfishness on the part of companies and the media has run down the clock, and it's vital to understand the depths of their treachery in order to hold them accountable. Only after considering these contexts can we come to understand the direness of our situation and begin to strategize a counter-attack.

The onset of our paralysis began in the earliest days of the industrial era, when corporate power weaponized government policy to benefit only the elite. We see this first in the Supreme Court’s neutering of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Although intended as a check on trade and monopolies, the Supreme Court refused to uphold it in face of pressure from corporate interests. Their decisions rebuffed any attempts to break up growing oil and tobacco monopolies, further limiting the law’s ability to only restricting “‘unreasonable’ combinations in restraint of trade” (Zinn 261). In doing so, the court would set the tone of the era, continually allowing the expansion of corporate power at the expense of the people. Such atrocities even weaseled their way into the Constitution, as elites successfully corrupted the 14th Amendment. The law, originally meant as a safeguard to African American rights, was reimagined to accept “that corporations were ‘persons’ and their money was property protected by the due process clause” (Zinn 261). With this victory in their pockets, corporations were granted free reign to spend their power in the halls of Congress, lobbying for their own interests—even if those interests would harm the American public.

The elites of this era were also the progenitors of neoliberalism, carefully planting the seeds of their ideology through propaganda. By erecting universities in their names, the wealthy conned the masses into believing they were good-natured philanthropists. In turn, their namesake institutions trained a legion of willing followers to uphold their ideologies. Among these was a carefully reimagined telling of the American dream, crafted by thinkers like Russell Conwell. Conwell, a Yale graduate, reached millions with his idea that hard work would yield riches. He preached to his audiences, convincing them that those in poverty were “made poor by [their] own shortcomings”, that the American dream was the product of good fortune and herculean effort. His teachings reflected the hegemonic beliefs of the day, and were intended to indoctrinate the masses to see wealth as a symbol of prestige, and poverty as a symptom of personal inadequacy (Zinn 262). Their propaganda nurtured the idea that competition was king, and those at the top had rightfully earned their place. From that, they convinced the public that the supreme rights granted to the victors were only natural. Thus, few came to question money’s place in politics or a corporation’s designation as a person under the 14th Amendment.

Propaganda’s use later blossomed towards the end 20th century, thanks to its success for the tobacco industry. Rather than refute the indisputable evidence against their products, these companies hired public relations firms. Their goal: to cast doubt on the scientific evidence presented against their product. By using TV personalities to create controversy, dispute the science, and manipulate language, the tobacco industry was able manufacture enough doubt to survive for decades. Through their media propaganda campaigns they successfully hid their knowledge of nicotine’s role in causing lung cancer, heart disease, and its status as an addictive drug. If not for leaked inside documents revealed in the 1990s, the public may never have known of the tobacco industry’s role in hiding and warping scientific evidence. Yet, even with the eventual downfall of the tobacco industry, their manipulative playbook continues to see use. As Professor Stanton Glantz explains in Merchants of Doubt, industries like the fossil fuel industry have adopted its tenets, reanimating the same excuses year after year. 

Now that we’ve covered the historical contexts that have prevented progress, we can consider how their legacies have manifested into barriers that continue to halt climate action. Atop those barriers sits the core of Big Tobacco’s scheming playbook: neoliberalism, an ideology we know “sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations” (Monbiot). It lauds hyper-individuality, discourages collectivism, and instead emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility and corporate power. We saw its sinister roots in its stranglehold on the 14th Amendment and the Sherman Act, which gave corporations the green light to leverage their massive bank accounts to hamstring any attempts to limit corporate power. And we see it in work now through lobbying and political donations made to demolish green policies. In Seattle for example, the city council unanimously voted to wipe its climate footprint within the coming decade. To do so, they planned to ban gas hookups in any new buildings, but according to the Guardian, their legislation died at the hands of a “sophisticated pushback plan for Seattle’s gas supplier, Puget Sound Energy”. Ironically, that pushback plan included the antithesis of neoliberalism: collectivism. By banding together with local utility companies, labor unions, and gas reliant businesses, they were able to argue that “natural gas is part of a clean energy future” (Holden). Yet, in spite of the obvious disconnect between what they preach and what they practice, these corporations have successfully shrouded their collaborative efforts with a thin veil of propaganda. By waging their own ideological war through media campaigns, corporations have fooled the masses “against the possibility of collective action” (Lukacs). In doing so, they preemptively sabotaged climate action for decades.

In addition to hiding the treacherous work of corporations, neoliberalism has cemented itself as a prevailing mindset in society today. It’s historic roots in modern society have ensured that collective change is not only shunned, but also unattainable. As people are born into a culture where we’re told to “think of ourselves as consumers instead of citizens, as self-reliant instead of interdependent” (Lukacs)?  Using ideas as old as the Gilded Age, corporations have sold the idea that failure is a personal problem, that consumerism is a sign of excellence. Television air time is monopolized by companies seeking to sell this lie, marketing their latest products or improving public image through false campaigns. As part of their propaganda, gas companies have even paid “Instagram influencers to cook with gas stoves… and sought to be quoted in important stories in news outlets like Reuters'' (Holden). Through these corporate efforts, neoliberalism enshrined itself as a core part of American society. Generational retellings of the same old lie then allow neoliberalist ideology to be inherited like a poisoned family heirloom. How can we learn to band together when we’re taught to see each other as competition fighting for the few top earning jobs, or if we’re busy working towards that new car we’ve been sold as a symbol of success?

Worst of all, the neoliberalist mindset impacts what policies are seen as politically viable, and therefore allow corporations to dictate the law that is passed. Under neoliberal theory, choices are made by those with the most spending power, but who has more spending power than corporations? Furthermore, with the political system readily accepting neoliberalism, the result has been “a disempowerment of the poor and the middle” classes (Monbiot). As a result, many feel powerless in our political system, as though their vote plays second fiddle to the whims of corporate interest. Coupled with propaganda that has convinced consumers that saving the planet is the consumer’s cost to bear, it’s no wonder that few Republicans questioned Trump’s abandonment of the Paris agreement, his rollback of environmental regulations or his boundless generosity to the fossil fuel industry (Reich). In fact, by leveraging their massive power in society, these corporations have pushed that cost onto consumers. As Myron Ebell, head of Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency put it, “carbon taxes are political poison because they increase gas prices and electricity rates” (Davenport). Therefore, politicians are forced to kneel to the whims of their corporate backers or face backlash from their distraught constituents who cannot afford the price hikes imposed by the corporations. Yet, not all hope is lost. By discarding the individualism that neoliberalism has sold us, we can learn to leverage collectivism to create solutions that work towards the greater public interest.

One such solution is the Green New Deal, a comprehensive set of climate reforms made to be the spiritual successor reforms passed by FDR following the Great Depression. Its namesake, the New Deal, while expansive and daring, was riddled issues that made it inequitable for many. In fact, the Home Owner’s Loan Corporation made to rescue the housing market exacerbated racial inequality in homeownership through their rating program. In assessing risk for loan eligibility, the HOLC created a color code system, marking neighborhoods as maximum risk if any African Americans lived there, “even if it was a solid middle-class neighborhood of single-family homes” (Rothstein 64). Using similar policies and assessments, city officials continually barred minorities from purchasing homes in newer communities, relegating them to neighborhoods with depreciated value. From these decisions stems the issue of environmental racism, where “communities of color are disproportionately burdened with health hazards through policies and practices that force them to live in proximity to sources of toxic waste” (Beech). Incidentally, these marginalized communities are the same ones to be hit hardest by the global climate crisis. Fortunately, the Green New Deal aims to address the mistakes its predecessor left behind. It aims to address income, environmental, and racial injustices across the board by calling for sweeping changes to the systems that have aided global warming in its destructive quest. Specifically, it aims to mobilize our industries for war against the main source of global warming: carbon emission. By convincing fuel companies to invest in renewable power, the Green New Deal seeks to turn the tide of battle against global warming. But how can we as citizens assist in the war effort?

Change must begin in the individual. As consumers we can be more mindful of our purchases, and choose to support companies that have taken tangible steps in reducing their carbon footprints. Through our wallets, we can turn the markets against the companies, forcing them to adopt climate-friendly policies and practices. We can also make individual efforts to reduce our own waste, to carpool when possible, and hold each responsible for our commitments to saving the environment. In doing so, we can begin to erode the neoliberal shackles that bind us and begin to create a sense of community. By cultivating a community-driven mindset we can learn to create a society that can work towards a common good and successfully overcome the present burdens that climate change has already wrought.

We must also lobby for change nationally. An official cannot seat themselves in Congress without the backing of the people. By showing support for climate initiatives and clean energy, we can force candidates to give green policies their due consideration. Through ballots cast in elections we can give power to those who would work for the general good and cast aside those that remain beholden to corporate interest.

Still, how do we convince those who remain unmoved by scientific evidence? Unsurprisingly, scientists have already begun unveiling secret weapons we can use to combat climate change. At Stanford, Professor Mark Z. Jacobson has spearheaded an effort to calculate how “each of the 50 states could power itself from renewable resources” (McKibben). His report shows great promise, with detailed figures that demonstrate how America could move to reinvent its energy infrastructure in the coming decades. Importantly, Jacobson’s plan requires a massive number of factories to churn out the solar panels, wind turbines, and efficient vehicles necessary to begin battling climate change. As we begin to dismantle the old fossil fuel infrastructures, we can mitigate the damage done by re-training their employees to take good paying jobs in these clean-energy facilities. By showcasing the economic potential these detailed plans possess, we can begin to enlist the aid of those not persuaded by the severity of the situation.

Finally, as the first generation born into the internet era, we can weaponize social media to raise awareness of the climate crisis. Data scientists like myself can begin to harness algorithmic power to create websites and systems that point people towards meaningful initiatives in support of combatting climate change. In a world now run by data, the possibilities are endless. Instead of allowing corporations to continue monopolizing advertising slots, we can saturate the internet with images and stories that prove the importance of participating in the fight against climate change. We can overload the search engines like Google, forcing their algorithms to display the problems with fossil fuels as top search results. We can even harness sites like Twitter and Facebook to create trends that encourage people to advocate for the environment. Together we can wake the world to the climate war that looms ahead.

Works Cited

Beech, Peter. “What Is Environmental Racism?” World Economic Forum, 31 July 2020. 

Davenport, Coral. “Major Climate Report Describes a Strong Risk of Crisis as Early as 2040.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 8 Oct. 2018. 

Holden, Emily. “Revealed: How the Gas Industry Is Waging War against Climate Action.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 20 Aug. 2020.

Kenner, Robert, director. Merchants of Doubt. Mongrel Media, Sony Pictures Classics, 2014. 

Lukacs, Martin. “Neoliberalism Has Conned Us into Fighting Climate Change as Individuals | Martin Lukacs.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 17 July 2017.

McKibben, Bill. “A World at War.” The New Republic, 15 Aug. 2016.

Monbiot, George. “Neoliberalism – the Ideology at the Root of All Our Problems.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 15 Apr. 2016.

Reich, Robert. “Fire and Pestilence, Flood and Wind, the Personal Is Political: Trump Must Go | Robert Reich.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 23 Aug. 2020.

Rothstein, Richard.” The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W.W. Norton & Company, 2018

Zinn, Howard. Excerpt from “Chapter 11: Robber Barons and Rebels.” A People’s History of the United States. Harper Collins, 2003. Pp. 253-268