Comments on: Polar Bears or A Clean Energy Economy: What Can Make Us Great?

By: gooseberry

gooseberry — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:35:24 +0000

In the UK a lot of big name companies started great and then went bad!
Probably not what the blog posting is about but…
The likes of Cadburys and Clarks shoes (and many others) in the UK were started with an ethical basis by Quakers. They provided schools, homes and medical care as a part of the ‘business plan’. They became very popular because of that philosophy, but then i think modern capitalism ran riot and they became big global corporates.

Lets hope the great environmental ideas today don’t fall foul in the same way.

By: Adam Zemel

Adam Zemel — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:41:43 +0000

I agree completely–what an incredible instillation of that message. Except I would replace “pessimism” with “realism.” And I also think you can apply the idea of “challenging hegemonic power structures” to the youth energy movement’s relationship with “previous waves of environmentalism.”

By: insurgent sociologist

insurgent sociologist — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:17:44 +0000

The Stockdale Paradox sounds like a new incarnation of Antonio Gramsci’s call for “pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will” in challenging hegemonic power structures, which it would seem is part of what we must accomplish that previous waves of environmentalism have not

By: Morgan

Morgan — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:29:02 +0000

Thanks for clearing some of that up. It makes more sense to me now, for sure. I’m looking forward to more ideas about how we do all that. no pressure.

By: Adam Zemel

Adam Zemel — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:28:05 +0000

Well, honestly, I don’t really think I’m saying any of that. I am saying (hopefully correctly), that at this point in time, there is no other youth movement or movement of any kind or age, that is so perfectly poised to take on the banner of advocacy and action for a clean energy economy that could lift billions out of poverty and achieve sustainable global prosperity. I am saying that because we are already framing our problem in terms of energy, because we are already thinking globally, and because we care about curbing our carbon emissions, we have set the foundation for a paradigm shift. This potential (and impending) shift would be from a paradigm of “let’s reduce emissions by 50% by 2050 and go back to 350 ppm of carbon by any means necessary because that will be best for the earth,” to a paradigm of “let’s quickly facilitate the transition to a clean energy society because that is the only way to responsibly create sustainable global prosperity for every person on Earth in a way that is healthy for our Earth.” I would also describe the first as a paradigm of, “let’s save our planet from ourselves,” and the second as a paradigm of, “let’s treat our planet responsibly and create responsible prosperity for ourselves.”

I am in not saying that we are “lobbying really well” (even if it wasn’t the ideal legislation, Lieberman-Warner failed last week), or that we are “putting increasing pressure on our politicians to change what’s politically feasible” (has Markey’s iCAP gotten anything but the quietest whispers of lip service?). Like I said, we must face the brutal facts: the few victories we have had in solving climate change are miniscule compared to what we need to achieve. What I am saying is that, with a lot of thought, and a lot of serious scrutiny about where we stand and where we could be standing, we could potentially become the movement that solved ecological crisis and created a society where every human could live a life of security and well being. I am saying the time has come for our movement to become great. We are not the best at anything yet, but we could be. As I say at the end: “We can take all this, and know it, and own it, and work towards it, and then we could be great.” Here I emphasize the “could.”

All the things you mentioned above are things we are good at. I am suggesting that for us to become great, we need to respond to the adversity in front of us with the proper attitude, maintain faith in our mission while confronting the brutal truths of our reality, and identify our potential to be the best.

By: Diana

Diana — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:22:26 +0000

Another really important issue that this post makes a nod towards, but doesn’t fully address, is the way in which we talk about these issues. Environmentalism for the environment’s sake certainly has value, but rather than talking about polar bears we need to stress the human costs of climate change. Adam is right: it’s also important to acknowledge the costs of clean energy (at least for the short-term). But the other side of this is that by recognizing these challenges, people will see that we have ideas to deal with them. That should be a big part of the conversation, and I think that will help us to propel the movement from good to great.

By: Morgan

Morgan — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 03:00:58 +0000

I feel like this post hits on the questions that some people on this blog and elsewhere have been asking: what are the real strengths of the youth movement and how to do we leverage them?

This post would be more exciting for me if it went a step further, and really challenged us to think of ‘how’ we are the “best in the world at advocating for and achieving global, sustainable, just and prosperous energy equity.” Are we lobbying really well? Are we putting increasing pressure on politicians to change what’s politically feasible? Are we taking solutions into our own hands and doing? Are we creating business models that change the frame of activism from not-for-profit to profitably transitional? Or is the post implying, (maybe correctly) that everything we’re doing, all rolled into one big youth climate movement, is on track to be great?

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 01:28:48 +0000

Does Breakthrough ever post anything new and insightful? I feel like I see the same talking points put out again and again.

Please also qualify how the environmental movement is only “good” at this point in time and how posting blogs critical of it make it “great.”