Those advocating quick and robust action to fight climate change have never been the most adept at communicating their message. From careless and aggressive social media messages (‘We know where you live. And we be many but you be few… ‘) to the No Pressure video blowing up schoolchildren, climate activists seem intent on ignoring the effective environmental messaging of previous decades.
It may have reached a new low recently. Bill McKibben, founder and former head of 350.org, recently called President Obama a ‘denier‘, equating him with Holocaust deniers (and me too, apparently). Considering all that Obama has done to further the cause of combating climate change–and considering the post he holds–it qualifies as perhaps the Stupidest Climate Message in history.
It is a Messaging Meltdown.
Andrew Revkin is that rare breed of journalist who can tell readers about his beliefs and still cover his beat dispassionately and fairly. He really is a throwback to the days when journalism attracted high quality minds and writers. He is passionate about the environment and firmly committed to fighting climate change. And yet Greg Laden has attacked Revkin for essentially collaborating with ‘the enemy’, or as other, saner people would put it, doing his job. Revkin not only converses with contrarians without screaming ‘denier’ at them, he actually (gasp) allows people with different views to… comment… on… his… blog! As that is basically unknown in the activist section of the blogosphere, we can understand Laden’s shock. (One of the crippling features of climate messaging is the fact that it never passes through the edifying crucible of debate, a conscious decision made by, well, the people contributing to this Meltdown, and so activist arguments are never sharpened by encountering the opposition–which is why skeptics and even lukewarmers just take the activists’ lunch money on the rare occasions that they do face off in a public forum.)
The writers of the recent EcoModernist manifesto are now being attacked by the activist Eli Rabett who, failing to find anything concrete in the Manifesto to object to, managed to create out of thin air a Manichean Manifesto desire to drive towards Marxist Industrial policy (or is it Industrial Marxist policy?), saying that when the Manifesto notes that people are moving into big cities they are implicitly accepting that some big cities have authoritarian central control mechanisms.
That’s a typical Klimate Konsensus ploy:
EcoMod: “I note that this trend is occurring. If it continues it will lessen human impact on the planet.”
KK: “I say this trend leads to more central control and less freedom. No, I don’t have evidence past Singapore and no, I won’t look at places like London or Rio de Janeiro where the opposite is the case.”
KK: “I have conclusively proved that EcoMods are out to take away your freedom! They are Maaarrrxxxxists! Maaarrrxxxxists! Maaarrrxxxxists!”
Not coincidentally, all of those guilty of this type of messaging also write long screeds bemoaning and bewailing the inability of the public to react appropriately to their messaging.