Jul 25, 2017 · 1 min read
I appreciated the differentiation between apocalypse and dystopia. But I’m also wondering if it’s better to put an even more positive spin on the global warming message. There’s some research out there showing how framing efforts to reduce the effects of global warming as ways to “return to a positive past” seem to be more effective in convincing conservatives: https://m.phys.org/news/2016-12-environmental-messages-positive-effective-convincing.html
This isn’t necessarily contradictory to your main point. Proulx’s book seems to carry that “positive past” message. But highlighting even a dystopic future still seems to only point out problems rather than illustrate solutions which could incite greater action.
