One reality that tends to go unnoticed is that there are many, many folks out there (because our economy is so dependent upon fossil fuels and fossil fuel infrastructure) who have felt victimized, at one time or another, by unnuanced environmental messaging that resorts to this sort of blanket demonization of how they make a living. To expect these folks to then embrace anything that has to do with "going green" is like asking them to hug their bully. As someone who works to advance the decarbonization of existing fossil fuels infrastructure (which preserves the existing workforce), I come across this dynamic regularly. It's stubbornly pervasive - oftentimes multigenerational - and I've had to develop my own creative strategies to subvert it. This is all to say that to change someone else's perspective, you often first have to change your own. 🤝
I love the spirit of this note and the idea of "blanket demonization." I also feel the multigenerational positions you mention are a true and difficult force in all of this. Thanks for engaging and for the work you do.
Just discovered your writing today, and I so appreciate this post. Much of my work involves talking with people of faith and conscience about climate change, and this is a terrific summary of what I've found to be true. Two immediate thoughts: first, I'd strike "If possible" from #12. Hope is a powerful motivator, far more than statistics, doom-and-gloom stories, or fear-based language. It's critical, not optional, for our conversations. I think that hearing the stories of the places where we've made progress or the people who have made an impact helps people to see that they truly are part of the solution. Second, being clear about language can help, particularly for politicized terminology. For example, I tend to use "climate disruption" or "climate crisis" rather than "climate change," and instead of "climate anxiety" I more often say "eco-anxiety," since that encompasses the many environmental disruptions one might feel anxious about. Thanks for this helpful list - I'll definitely be adding this to a reading list I'll be using when I talk with congregational leaders and members.
Dear Tim - this is a beautiful, honest, and thorough response. I so appreciate you engaging with me and my ideas here, and for sharing yours, and for undertaking the challenging work you do. With gratitude, MMB
I appreciate these tips so much and know I'll be returning to them. I grew up in small-town Alberta and several close family members worked or are still working in the oil and gas industry. I became an environmentalist when I began uni and moved away many years ago, and coming back is never easy. Learning how to navigate family relationships where climate denialism and conspiracy theories are thriving has been, and will continue to be, a challenging ride. Thanks, Megan, for another thoughtful post.
You are in the thick of it - and I suspect you have much to offer others based on your real experiences in this space. A challenging ride it is. Thanks for reading and engaging here.
Never thought I'd see a photo and go, that looks like Joanie's on Tamiami Trail---and then scroll further to find out I was right! Used to drive by that place often and ate there a couple of times when I worked out there.
I find having honest conversations works best, slowly, and asking curious questions to find out where they got some tidbit of information from. Then I try to not "well actually" them but give them information back or ideas for them to investigate themselves. It takes time, which isn't always ideal, but it works.
I love the notion of not using "well actually" energy. "Well actually" was very much me in my twenties, when I thought I had the world figured out. Now I know better.
Hi Megan! You've got me rockin' on my hobby horse with this post. I have lots of thoughts... Don't get me wrong, I'm Harris-Walz all the way, but in the past year, I've had so many disappointing conversations (or lack thereof) w my progressive peers. This bit that you wrote, I truly feel-- "Research shows that people stick with what they know because of laziness and social cost." I have paid a major social cost in disagreeing with my progressive friends. They seem to look at me like I'm just too emotional and I haven't read the right articles or listened to the right podcasts--If only I could be more rational!! But really, I see their own emotions wrapped up in their "rational" argument. What I'm trying to say is: It's been really interesting to be on this side of things. My biggest takeaway is that I don't think we can get anywhere in a disagreement if we come to it unwilling to be changed ourselves. xoxxo
Yes - the social cost of disagreement feels steep these days. I've definitely been in conversations where people say "I wouldn't say this online, but." I'm pretty darn left but I've never been a fan of following blindly - mainly because as a southerner I saw its toll on critical thinking. I hope we gain more safety for disagreement in a post-T era.
One reality that tends to go unnoticed is that there are many, many folks out there (because our economy is so dependent upon fossil fuels and fossil fuel infrastructure) who have felt victimized, at one time or another, by unnuanced environmental messaging that resorts to this sort of blanket demonization of how they make a living. To expect these folks to then embrace anything that has to do with "going green" is like asking them to hug their bully. As someone who works to advance the decarbonization of existing fossil fuels infrastructure (which preserves the existing workforce), I come across this dynamic regularly. It's stubbornly pervasive - oftentimes multigenerational - and I've had to develop my own creative strategies to subvert it. This is all to say that to change someone else's perspective, you often first have to change your own. 🤝
I love the spirit of this note and the idea of "blanket demonization." I also feel the multigenerational positions you mention are a true and difficult force in all of this. Thanks for engaging and for the work you do.
Just discovered your writing today, and I so appreciate this post. Much of my work involves talking with people of faith and conscience about climate change, and this is a terrific summary of what I've found to be true. Two immediate thoughts: first, I'd strike "If possible" from #12. Hope is a powerful motivator, far more than statistics, doom-and-gloom stories, or fear-based language. It's critical, not optional, for our conversations. I think that hearing the stories of the places where we've made progress or the people who have made an impact helps people to see that they truly are part of the solution. Second, being clear about language can help, particularly for politicized terminology. For example, I tend to use "climate disruption" or "climate crisis" rather than "climate change," and instead of "climate anxiety" I more often say "eco-anxiety," since that encompasses the many environmental disruptions one might feel anxious about. Thanks for this helpful list - I'll definitely be adding this to a reading list I'll be using when I talk with congregational leaders and members.
Dear Tim - this is a beautiful, honest, and thorough response. I so appreciate you engaging with me and my ideas here, and for sharing yours, and for undertaking the challenging work you do. With gratitude, MMB
I appreciate these tips so much and know I'll be returning to them. I grew up in small-town Alberta and several close family members worked or are still working in the oil and gas industry. I became an environmentalist when I began uni and moved away many years ago, and coming back is never easy. Learning how to navigate family relationships where climate denialism and conspiracy theories are thriving has been, and will continue to be, a challenging ride. Thanks, Megan, for another thoughtful post.
You are in the thick of it - and I suspect you have much to offer others based on your real experiences in this space. A challenging ride it is. Thanks for reading and engaging here.
Never thought I'd see a photo and go, that looks like Joanie's on Tamiami Trail---and then scroll further to find out I was right! Used to drive by that place often and ate there a couple of times when I worked out there.
I find having honest conversations works best, slowly, and asking curious questions to find out where they got some tidbit of information from. Then I try to not "well actually" them but give them information back or ideas for them to investigate themselves. It takes time, which isn't always ideal, but it works.
I love the notion of not using "well actually" energy. "Well actually" was very much me in my twenties, when I thought I had the world figured out. Now I know better.
Thanks, Megan. A great post. I'll want to reread often during this election season. Wise, insightful, important.
I always love talking with you about these kinds of things. Thanks for reading and engaging here! xo -M
Hi Megan! You've got me rockin' on my hobby horse with this post. I have lots of thoughts... Don't get me wrong, I'm Harris-Walz all the way, but in the past year, I've had so many disappointing conversations (or lack thereof) w my progressive peers. This bit that you wrote, I truly feel-- "Research shows that people stick with what they know because of laziness and social cost." I have paid a major social cost in disagreeing with my progressive friends. They seem to look at me like I'm just too emotional and I haven't read the right articles or listened to the right podcasts--If only I could be more rational!! But really, I see their own emotions wrapped up in their "rational" argument. What I'm trying to say is: It's been really interesting to be on this side of things. My biggest takeaway is that I don't think we can get anywhere in a disagreement if we come to it unwilling to be changed ourselves. xoxxo
Yes - the social cost of disagreement feels steep these days. I've definitely been in conversations where people say "I wouldn't say this online, but." I'm pretty darn left but I've never been a fan of following blindly - mainly because as a southerner I saw its toll on critical thinking. I hope we gain more safety for disagreement in a post-T era.