Let’s Ditch Climate Emergencies and Start a Positive Narrative

Our leaders are still in denial, but under them a strong movement is emerging.

The last in date was the European Parliament. They declared a Climate Emergency on 28 November 2019. Right now over 1200 jurisdictions around the world have declared such an emergency.

Emergencies conjure images of war like situations. When the wellbeing of people is at great risk, an emergency can be declared. It allows government to seize control with radical measures, to circumvent the normal institutional arrangements, to deploy the army and to redirect the economy towards solving the crisis as swiftly and boldly as possible. Declaring an emergency is no small step.

Having lived in Bangkok for a couple of years, I experienced a (short) emergency in May 2010 when opposing groups and endless demonstrations turned into civil unrest, arsoning and military intervention. This happened just a few blocks away from our apartment.

Our leaders are still in denial, but under them a strong movement is emerging

At that time, my youngest was just 3 months old, and though we never really felt unsafe, we became very careful, only went out for the necessary shopping and followed the latest developments through social media. Military were posted at every street corner; there was a curfew starting 6pm and the fumes of burning tyres passed by over our condominium (so we kept the windows closed and air conditioning on).

What I did come to learn is that the emergency made our lives infuriatingly easy (all small pleasures of life like going out, meeting with friends were made impossible) and incredibly more complicated (because certainties we took for granted about safety, water and food supplies were not anymore).

Some people draw a parallel between the climate emergencies and war mobilisations. For example: the mobilisation the USA declared after it was drawn into the second world by its attack on Pearl Harbour. What where the consequences?

Well, hold your breath… in just a couple of years the US became, as President Roosevelt called it, ‘the arsenal of democracy.’ Massive public investments and strong government regulations were used to mobilize the whole economy into a war economy. By the end of the war, the US had produced nearly two third of all munitions used by the Allied Forces. The costs were unfathomable: at the height of the mobilisation 45% of GDP went to the defence industry. A quarter of all factories were in state hands. The ones that were not had no choice than to follow government’s orders. And that for a capitalist country.

We need to ditch the concept of Climate Emergencies and start connecting the dots of this positive narrative so it may emerge

But offers were also asked on individual level. Huge offers. Not a single person in the US stayed unaffected by the war-emergency. Gasoline, meat and textile became heavily rationalised. Wages were controlled. And income taxes rose to around 90% for the higher incomes (for which the threshold was lowered). Money was hard to spend because of the fewer goods that could be purchased. As long as the war was waging, people were willing to swallow these sacrifices.

Of course valour in combat was important to win the war, but ultimately turning the economy into a war production machine did the heavy lifting.

With the war mobilisations in mind, I am actually not sure Climate Emergencies are helpful. Clearly, emergencies ask for huge offers. And right now, such offers seems just too much to take to save the Climate. Looking around, I just wonder where the will for such offers will come from. If, to name just an example, a couple of cents increase on gas price due to a carbon tax already leads to weeklong street fights like the Gilets Jaunes in France, it’s clear the narrative of Climate Emergencies is not going to work.

So what example could we be turning to? Where could we find an inspiring and aspiring model for change? An example in which a positive narrative got along with a big change requesting huge offers from many people?

The closest example that comes to mind is the German reunification. On 1 October 1990, Germany officially became one. A tremendous effort to align and merge the two different countries was kick-started. And though (sometimes big) differences remain between the two former countries, the two Germanies have succeeded in a huge transformation and integration on all levels of society.

In 2015, for the 25th anniversary, the Berlin Institute for Population and Development released a report about how the reunification was going. It’s then director Reiner Klingholz said: ‘there is no example of merging two states with such vastly different political systems that has worked so smoothly.’ The reunification transformed communist East-Germany into the capitalist model of their neighbours. And that at break-neck speed.

Yes, differences still remain between the two former countries. And there are valid points to be made that there are dark sides to this transformation. But throughout the transformation, the narrative has been positive (‘we’re creating a unified Germany’) and the populations of both countries have been willing to swallow big offers.

The two countries became one not because an emergency was declared, but because there was this motivation to become one and to make this happen. Whatever it had to take. The Germans simply wanted to live in one country. And so they did. Without overthinking to much the consequence.

An emergency, by contrast, is always an answer from the negative. The (perceived) risk of getting worse becomes so big that one needs to act. But such a starting point is never motivational and aspirational. That’s why so little happens after declaring a Climate Emergency. It just feeds the stifling eco-anxiety.

So how do we get a positive German reunification type style of narrative into the Climate discussion? I believe the signs are already there. 2019 was the year in which a social awakening, especially from the young has taken place. People suddenly realised they were not alone and started marching together in the streets.

A new narrative seems to be emerging from the bottom, from more and more people that show and say they want the change. Our leaders are still in denial, but under them a strong movement is emerging. George Monbiot is talking about a political rewilding in which the political space is being recaptured from the bottom. Some leaders get this and in their jurisdictions (be at local or at national level) they organise with strong participation of their constituents and then step back in order for the solution to grow and evolve.

It’s by using this diversity and participation that we’ll be able to find new ways and create new stories about how we want to overcome our Climate Crisis. The story by Eric Holthaus in the Correspondent in which he traces a roadmap to end the Climate Crisis in 10 years is a good example of this. Or this story by Charlie Mitchell, in which the focus is much more on positive initiatives instead of reading fear-mongering UN reports. And there are many, many more germs of this new positive narrative around.

But for that we need to ditch the concept of Climate Emergencies and start connecting the dots of this positive narrative so it may emerge. By doing so we might overcome our collective fear to act on the Climate Crisis.