What if the resistance to climate science is not really about science at all?
Culture wars are proxy wars for class class. Climate change is an important part of the second, so it’s going to be part of the first.
I find this article to be to the point. Copy pasting a part of it.
Yet even as fires, floods, and heat waves become noticeably worse, Democrats and Republicans are further apart on the science of human-caused global warming than almost any other issue. Some observers have noted that the resistance to accepting climate science might not be about the science at all, but what attempts to fix the problem might entail. An experiment in 2014 found that Republicans who read a speech about the United States using environmentally friendly technologies to fuel the economy, versus a speech about enacting stringent environmental regulations and pollution taxes, were twice as likely as other Republicans to agree with mainstream climate science. In other words, it might be easier to just ignore a problem if you don’t like the proposed solution.
“When you make this shift from having an opinion to understanding the concern that underlies the opinion, it’s really a different kind of conversation,” Barish said.
The approach is reminiscent of “deep canvassing,” an outreach method developed by LGBTQ+ advocates that involves listening to people’s worries without judgment and helping them work through their conflicted feelings. Personal conversations like these have been shown to change people’s minds, with lasting effects.
As long as the polluters control the political process, they’ll keep polluting. This is not a discussion of effective ways of convincing people who have good faith. This is a question of raw political power.
The only way to do that is to break the backs of the fossil-fuel companies. That’s where the lies are coming from.
You need to stop the propaganda pollution at the source, so to speak.
