I just finished this long, very long read from the Atlantic that revisits the water crisis in Arizona and touches on a lot of the things you mention in your piece.
Dave - you nailed this - 2 years ago. Now, even insurance companies - Zurich who on report on the crisis "There could be 1.2 billion climate refugees by 2050". We do have agency and don't need "strongmen".
This is — again — a piece that deserves to be widely read.
I am somewhat convinced that we are at the limits of what human intelligence can or cannot solve here. Human intelligence is biologically adapted to be speedy (or you won't survive or be successful) as well as efficient (only 20W or so up there). The solution that evolved leans heavily upon 'mental automation', e.g. 'convictions'. These convictions are easily hijacked, e.g. by simple answers. They are also much more powerful in shaping us than we care to admit. Convictions shape our observations and reasonings far more than the opposite. We believe — we are convinced — our convictions come from our observations and reasonings. The opposite is probably more true.
Instead, our convictions come from (1) what for us feels as 'close' (autocrats and influencers behave such that they hack directly into that mechanism), as a tribe/family member sort of, and (2) what we hear/see often. The destructive effect of (mostly right wing) talk radio (on commuting America) and Fox News and friends is an important aspect why get convinced by lies (we do not think they are lies of course).
So, missing from your solution is protecting society (humans) from lies that create the shared convictions on which a society rests. Fox News having to pay 780 million dollar simply doesn't really work if the lies keep on being repeated and repeated over again, thus hijacking the core mechanisms of human intelligence into creating convictions that no attempt to argue (e.g. your number 4) has a realistic chance to budge. Have you ever tried to convince a flat earther that the earth is a globe? The problem is more or less that we humans are all 'flat earthers' in a sense.
The autocrats use 'free speech' to win by simplistic lies, but the first thing they do when they have won is restrict free speech. Nobody else should have the option of 'convincing' than they. See history. See today. What we really need is a better way to protect us all against how easily we can be misled. All of us. Flat earthers aren't crazy. They are above all very *human*.
And their convictions — as well as ours — are hard to change. That too is probably an evolutionary necessity. You cannot have an effective tribe unless you have to determine what others think every time from scratch.
If there is one think we humans underestimate about ourselves is our level of internal automation (that, incidentally, comes with a lot of the same aspects as the digital automation we see these days: hard to change...)
Still on point. Americans historically only take drastic action in the face of a crisis or fear, or both. Texas and Arizona already have their hands full with heat, and its not getting any cooler for a long, long time. If people think there's a crisis at the border now, just you wait.
If the climate crisis, such as it is, prompts more refugees, it’s not going to be a boon to anyone. But I believe that the mass migration is not caused by climate, it’s prompted by policies in the destination countries. There are existing conditions for asylum, and that doesn’t mean migration to wherever you want, but to the closest safe country. In the area of energy policy the establishment has handled this very badly, promoting Rube Goldberg machines like wind and solar and ignoring real solutions that could reduce emissions.
When its 120% F at night policy is not at the top of the list.So far migration (we havent seen "mass" yet) is economic/policy driven. Climate chage is going to change that calculation when your choice is move or die.
Don’t disagree that we should move, just what we have moved to so far. Rube Goldberg machines won’t improve things, they’re intermittent and make the grid less stable. And especially considering that there are billions of people in other countries who will increase their energy consumption. Those countries will not rely on Rube Goldberg machines. Energy dense clean sources of power generation are needed.
I just finished this long, very long read from the Atlantic that revisits the water crisis in Arizona and touches on a lot of the things you mention in your piece.
The Most American City https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/07/phoenix-climate-drought-republican-politics/678494/
Dave - you nailed this - 2 years ago. Now, even insurance companies - Zurich who on report on the crisis "There could be 1.2 billion climate refugees by 2050". We do have agency and don't need "strongmen".
https://www.zurich.com/en/media/magazine/2022/there-could-be-1-2-billion-climate-refugees-by-2050-here-s-what-you-need-to-know
This is — again — a piece that deserves to be widely read.
I am somewhat convinced that we are at the limits of what human intelligence can or cannot solve here. Human intelligence is biologically adapted to be speedy (or you won't survive or be successful) as well as efficient (only 20W or so up there). The solution that evolved leans heavily upon 'mental automation', e.g. 'convictions'. These convictions are easily hijacked, e.g. by simple answers. They are also much more powerful in shaping us than we care to admit. Convictions shape our observations and reasonings far more than the opposite. We believe — we are convinced — our convictions come from our observations and reasonings. The opposite is probably more true.
Instead, our convictions come from (1) what for us feels as 'close' (autocrats and influencers behave such that they hack directly into that mechanism), as a tribe/family member sort of, and (2) what we hear/see often. The destructive effect of (mostly right wing) talk radio (on commuting America) and Fox News and friends is an important aspect why get convinced by lies (we do not think they are lies of course).
So, missing from your solution is protecting society (humans) from lies that create the shared convictions on which a society rests. Fox News having to pay 780 million dollar simply doesn't really work if the lies keep on being repeated and repeated over again, thus hijacking the core mechanisms of human intelligence into creating convictions that no attempt to argue (e.g. your number 4) has a realistic chance to budge. Have you ever tried to convince a flat earther that the earth is a globe? The problem is more or less that we humans are all 'flat earthers' in a sense.
The autocrats use 'free speech' to win by simplistic lies, but the first thing they do when they have won is restrict free speech. Nobody else should have the option of 'convincing' than they. See history. See today. What we really need is a better way to protect us all against how easily we can be misled. All of us. Flat earthers aren't crazy. They are above all very *human*.
And their convictions — as well as ours — are hard to change. That too is probably an evolutionary necessity. You cannot have an effective tribe unless you have to determine what others think every time from scratch.
If there is one think we humans underestimate about ourselves is our level of internal automation (that, incidentally, comes with a lot of the same aspects as the digital automation we see these days: hard to change...)
(See https://ea.rna.nl/2020/03/04/gossip-trust-and-the-information-revolution/ and https://ea.rna.nl/2022/10/24/on-the-psychology-of-architecture-and-the-architecture-of-psychology/)
I wish Betteridge's Law was real.
Thank you for this perspective. It helps to understand why Trump has so much traction, and why climate change isn’t taken seriously.
Still on point. Americans historically only take drastic action in the face of a crisis or fear, or both. Texas and Arizona already have their hands full with heat, and its not getting any cooler for a long, long time. If people think there's a crisis at the border now, just you wait.
If the climate crisis, such as it is, prompts more refugees, it’s not going to be a boon to anyone. But I believe that the mass migration is not caused by climate, it’s prompted by policies in the destination countries. There are existing conditions for asylum, and that doesn’t mean migration to wherever you want, but to the closest safe country. In the area of energy policy the establishment has handled this very badly, promoting Rube Goldberg machines like wind and solar and ignoring real solutions that could reduce emissions.
When its 120% F at night policy is not at the top of the list.So far migration (we havent seen "mass" yet) is economic/policy driven. Climate chage is going to change that calculation when your choice is move or die.
Don’t disagree that we should move, just what we have moved to so far. Rube Goldberg machines won’t improve things, they’re intermittent and make the grid less stable. And especially considering that there are billions of people in other countries who will increase their energy consumption. Those countries will not rely on Rube Goldberg machines. Energy dense clean sources of power generation are needed.
Couldn't agree more!