Arnold Schwarzenegger is being offered up as an eco-hero, so naturally some folks in the green movement rush to point out that it's all a big fraud.
Why they do that -- why progressives eat their allies -- I'll never understand.
Let's approach this through a semi-related phenomenon. I had the privilege of meeting Andrew Dessler in person the other day (how'd your talk go, Andrew?), and we discussed, among other things, how several climate change skeptics started off lightly flirting with craziness, before descending over time into full-on Inhofian fruitloopitude.
How does that happen? I speculate it goes something like this: When they first flirt with skeptical notions, they receive instant acclaim from a large horde of skeptics and flattering attention from the "balance"-seeking media. They also receive caustic, dismissive criticism from reality partisans. The praise pleases the ego. The criticism sparks resentment.
The human ego will naturally lean into what praises it and away from what hurts it. It's self-reinforcing. Next thing you know, you've been pulled into the warm, wackadoo bosom of the skeptic community, and you feel, like them, part of a besieged band of outlaws.
Schwarzenegger's case shows that the opposite can happen as well. He knew he was not historically and authentically an environmentalist. He worried aloud that he wouldn't be accepted as one: "I'm environmentally conscious, rather than an environmentalist. It's just too strong." But he pushed the green angle, passed some historic bills, and in return was easily re-elected in a shower of media praise. He became a green celebrity.
Did he start down the road with pure intentions? Who cares? He can't help being affected by the experience. You can see him lately beginning to take ownership of it, really puzzle out how it fits with his temperament, history, and politics. He's working it into his self-definition, showing other Republicans the path.
He'll never be the visionary leader greens want him to be, but he's an extremely powerful force -- an enormous influence on state, national, even international politics. Isn't it better he feel himself our ally, and that we encourage and embrace that alliance?
It's often said that conservatives seek out converts, while progressives seek out heretics. That's too often true of the green community.
Everyone's supposed to pass all these tests of consistency and commitment before they're allowed to speak out. Gore's got a big house. Arnold's got Hummers. Lester Brown probably pees in the shower. We constantly worry about whether people deserve to speak out about the environment, whether impure spokespeople will tarnish the movement, whether offering people too-easy personal solutions will anesthetize or stupefy them, whether passing imperfect legislation will forever exhaust our political capital.
As I've said before, these are the worries and preoccupations of people accustomed to being losers -- people who don't believe their cause is broadly compelling. I quote myself:
It's time to make the mental adjustment and start behaving like gracious winners rather than resentful losers. That means welcoming and encouraging people's efforts, working with them respectfully, without condescension or suspicion, to find more effective ways to continue down the path of sustainability. We've got to stop assuming, at the outset, that everyone's faking it for the cameras. Nobody's trying to give us a wedgie.
There is one thing -- and I doubt there's more than one -- we can learn from Karl Rove: people love a winner. It's reptile-brain psychology. You want people to be attracted to your cause out of desire and not guilt-ridden obligation? Then like Bill McKibben said:
Don't forget to smile! You are involved in an age-old war, waged against the powerful on behalf of the powerless. You're intellectually engaged, socially connected, and civically involved. You are creating a new future. It's a head-trip. It's meaningful. It's exciting. It's fun.
You are so righteous and so joyous that even the powerful, the wealthy, and the famous are pulled into your orbit. They want to join with you in the calling of a generation. Of course Arnold wants to be one of your tribe! Who wouldn't?
Instead of hectoring or tearing down newcomers, you trust that the cause itself will change them. Everyone has their own path, but sooner or later we're all going to be moving in the same direction: healing our breach with the living world we inhabit, becoming more ingenious, more prosperous, and happier in the process. Be confident.
Climate Citizen: Mary Stuart Masterson
Climate psychology in cartoons: clues for solving the messaging mystery
Comments
View as Flat
ookla Posted 6:36 am
19 Apr 2007
It is a source of constant annoyance for me that too many members of the environmental community seem to think it's some sort of exclusive club.
The truth of the matter is - exclusivity isn't going to win the day for sustainability and the environment. We need to include any and all who want to make a difference. Even small steps need to be acknowledged and celebrated.
Very rarely does 'conversion' happen instantaneously. Awareness and acceptance take time as does personal reflection. People taking tentative steps down the path should be supported (particularly when the actions are being noted by a larger community).
Permalink
sunflower Posted 7:10 am
19 Apr 2007
I am glad the Terminator is on our side.
Permalink
WKB Posted 7:25 am
19 Apr 2007
Permalink
Tom Philpott Posted 9:28 am
19 Apr 2007
Victual Reality
Permalink
PhilipL42 Posted 10:46 am
19 Apr 2007
We just gotta keep focused on results and get over the rest. Lincoln said "Stand with the man who is right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." Right now, Schwartzenegger is in the right place -- or at least not in the wrong one.
Permalink
yoder Posted 11:29 am
19 Apr 2007
Of course this does not only occur on Green forums. I think it is human nature that the more invested you are in something the less open you are to competing views.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act!"
-- George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair)
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 11:36 am
19 Apr 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 11:59 am
19 Apr 2007
We are winners in the sense that deniers are being isolated. But we are not winners in the sense that what needs to be done is being done. I don't think we should be too quick to welcome those coming over to out side with quack remedies that delay real solution.
In any battle, whether as mannered as a chess game, or as brutal as a back alley brawl you have to think more than one move ahead. I will note that if you want to imitate Karl Rove's successes, if not his ethics, remember that the far rights welcoming of converts always included litmus tests. You wanted to gain the support of the right, it was not enough to say "family values good, liberals bad". You had to pass some bright line test on issues; maybe in certain circumstances they would let off the hook to diverge on one or two issues, but you had better do what they considered the right thing on at least eight out of ten.
I agree with the premise is that I'd rather have someone inside the tent pissing out, that outside pissing in. What I don't want is someone inside the tend pissing in.
Permalink
GulfAaron Posted 12:40 pm
19 Apr 2007
That same coalition fights an awful lot about the proper management of red snapper (3% of historic levels currently) and whether or not we need to crack down on shrimp bycatch or annual catch levels of the recreational sector (my answer is both).
I can respect their perspectives (as I disagree with them to decisionmakers and the media), because I respect them as people, and we are actively looking for opportunities to work together again - primarily because we all care about the natural resources we share (and it's awfully fun to win!)
Some sort of purity test is garbage. It comes down to this question: do you want to win, or do you simply want to feel good about your self and your valiant (if doomed) struggle?
Gulf Restoration Network United for a Healthy Gulf
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 2:11 pm
19 Apr 2007
Permalink
Zarkov Posted 3:15 pm
19 Apr 2007
LOL, better wake up then, y'all been hoodwinked.
>> I don't think we should be too quick to welcome those coming over to out side with quack remedies that delay real solution. >>
Define "quack remedies". Already you are us and them...... no solution there.
Love to know what a "real solution" would be.
What is YOUR science ? just a gut feeling ?
or are you just clueless and following the clueless leader ?
The unfolding global situation is way too serious for you to remain ignorant.... it is not going to go away, and the talk and inaction in the world will not provide a solution.
This site has failed totally in encouraging and highlighting debate on global climate change. All proposals I have read here and there, are all children's stories.
The really scary part to all this is
"What will happen when 50% of the world's population does not have enough water to drink ???"
omegafour.com maybe your last chance to redirect your life.
Permalink
Pangolin Posted 3:27 pm
19 Apr 2007
There is no practical hydrogen economy and the hydrogen Hummer is not driven because there isn't enough range to get it from one fueling station to the next. Likewise every other environmental program Arnold is going to propose is designed to delay the conversion from internal combustion engines. Ethanol, biodiesel, hydrogen, anything but plug-in hybrid vehicles that would actually meet peoples needs in a realistic way.
Likewise California has no high speed rail system although the state's geography is ideal for one AND the voters overwhelmingly approve of the idea. In fact the current passenger rail system is so bad that many areas had better service in 1915. You won't see Arnold promoting THAT either.
While some environmentalists are celebrating that fact that they are being let into the halls of power they fail to notice that they wait at the entrance while the oil companies are being entertained in the ballroom.
Accepting greenwashing has many risks; we don't have a spare planet to go to.
Permalink
Bloggernista Posted 9:38 pm
19 Apr 2007
I really don't consider myself an environmentalist. That label to me has too many qualifiers and has been defined in a very narrow way. If you want to grow the movement, save the planet or what ever it is you are trying to do, stop looking down on people and instead invite them in to participate in finding real solutions. And get a sense of humor.
Permalink
Benny Big Eye Posted 12:03 am
20 Apr 2007
Benny Big Eye
Permalink
randino Posted 1:35 am
20 Apr 2007
Randy Cunningham
Randy Cunningham
Permalink
knitrat Posted 1:50 am
20 Apr 2007
We need to create more room for people who are on the path to more awareness, but aren't all the way there yet.
Is eco-aware consumption a trendy fad? Yes, but who cares, as long as people do it. It causes less damage to the planet in the interim as we try to bring the more complex issues of globalization, sustainability etc. into popular societal discourse.
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 8:34 am
20 Apr 2007
Rather than prolonging this discussion, I'm going to make a multi-part prediction:
1) The Democratic candidate for President will be imperfect, but far preferable on climate chaos and other environmental issues to the Republican candidate in 2008.
2)Arnie will endorse the Republican candidate.
3)Arnie will use his new "eco-hero" status to help convince moderates that the Republican candidate is not bad on the environment. After all a centrist eco-hero like the gropenfuhrer supports him. Anyone who insists that Democrat is significantly better than the Republican on that issue must be some sort of an extremist.
4)Wanna-be political "realists" still won't understand that welcoming people into the big tent who you have good reason to believe are going to pee on your shoes is not truly realistic.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 8:44 am
20 Apr 2007
And who is the "we," in "We want those who want ... "?
I have no doubt that you have observed something true and interesting. But I think perhaps you need to say more about it.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
radrerun Posted 4:03 am
24 Apr 2007
Agreed. While I do agree with David on the point of not being (angrily, used to be for me) condescending or full of suspicion towards the potential converts (I'm much better now, thanks), there's nothing wrong with criticizing politicians (sometimes it seems like the only way to get through to them or get them on the right path). The time for trying to meekly ask for what we want and then walk away with our tails between our legs should be OVER. We really need to learn how to hold our elected officials accountable and not just end up saying, "Oh, well they have the best chance of winning." Vote them out and find a better suitor (maybe you!) that will actually work for what we want (wind, solar, lithium-ion vehicles).
And Gar, extra points and a high-five for the use of the word "gropenfuhrer."
Roberts' use of fruitloopitude also rocks.
Permalink