Scientific American’s Sarah Jaquette Ray is almost positioning “climate anxiety” as a raaaaacist thing, because, of course everything has to have a racial component these days, right? If you look at the URL, the original headline was “The Unbearable Whiteness Of Climate Anxiety”
Climate Anxiety Is an Overwhelmingly White Phenomenon
Is it really just code for white people wishing to hold onto their way of life or get “back to normal?”
The climate movement is ascendant, and it has become common to see climate change as a social justice issue. Climate change and its effects—pandemics, pollution, natural disasters—are not universally or uniformly felt: the people and communities suffering most are disproportionately Black, Indigenous and people of color. It is no surprise then that U.S. surveys show that these are the communities most concerned about climate change.
One year ago, I published a book called A Field Guide to Climate Anxiety. Since its publication, I have been struck by the fact that those responding to the concept of climate anxiety are overwhelmingly white. Indeed, these climate anxiety circles are even whiter than the environmental circles I’ve been in for decades. Today, a year into the pandemic, after the murder of George Floyd and the protests that followed, and the attack on the U.S. Capitol, I am deeply concerned about the racial implications of climate anxiety. If people of color are more concerned about climate change than white people, why is the interest in climate anxiety so white? Is climate anxiety a form of white fragility or even racial anxiety? Put another way, is climate anxiety just code for white people wishing to hold onto their way of life or get “back to normal,†to the comforts of their privilege?
The white response to climate change is literally suffocating to people of color. Climate anxiety can operate like white fragility, sucking up all the oxygen in the room and devoting resources toward appeasing the dominant group. As climate refugees are framed as a climate security threat, will the climate-anxious recognize their role in displacing people from around the globe? Will they be able to see their own fates tied to the fates of the dispossessed? Or will they hoard resources, limit the rights of the most affected and seek to save only their own, deluded that this xenophobic strategy will save them? How can we make sure that climate anxiety is harnessed for climate justice?
Oh, wait, not “almost positioning”, she is positioning white Warmists (these are her own fellow believers, people who mostly vote Democrat here in the US) as racist. Perhaps her fellow white climate cultists are just more fragile then all the Black, Indigenous and people of color (isn’t it racist to see people only by their skin color, rather than as individuals?), plus, let’s face it, most of the whites proclaiming climate anxiety are upper middle class to rich, who can afford to really care about the climate crisis scam.
And climate panic can be as dangerous as it is galvanizing. Dealing with feelings of climate anxiety will require the existential tools I provided in A Field Guide to Climate Anxiety, but it will also require careful attention to extremism and climate zealotry. We can’t fight climate change with more racism. Climate anxiety must be directed toward addressing the ways that racism manifests as environmental trauma and vice versa—how environmentalism manifests as racialized violence. We need to channel grief toward collective liberation.
I’ve been saying for over 15 years that this who thing is really not about science, or even a mildly changing climate, but, politics. They keep proving I’m right.
Today’s progressives espouse climate change as the “greatest existential threat of our time,†a claim that ignores people who have been experiencing existential threats for much longer. Slavery, colonialism, ongoing police brutality—we can’t neglect history to save the future.
So, white Warmists are racist positioning ‘climate change’ as the biggest threat, rather than slavery, which the US hasn’t had in 170 years?
Oppressed and marginalized people have developed traditions of resilience out of necessity. Black, feminist and Indigenous leaders have painstakingly cultivated resilience over the long arc of the fight for justice. They know that protecting joy and hope is the ultimate resistance to domination. Persistence is nonnegotiable when your mental, physical and reproductive health are on the line.
Huh what? How’d this get to abortion on demand? Which is also something, let’s remember, which Democrats wanted especially for the black areas, because Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, was a massive racist, along with the Democrats, and wanted to reduce the population of blacks and other non-white groups.
Instead of asking “What can I do to stop feeling so anxious?â€, “What can I do to save the planet?†and “What hope is there?â€, people with privilege can be asking “Who am I?†and “How am I connected to all of this?â€Â The answers reveal that we are deeply interconnected with the well-being of others on this planet, and that there are traditions of environmental stewardship that can be guides for where we need to go from here.
These people live by creating racial strife: the question now becomes, does this mentality invade the Cult of Climastrology, with the white Warmists genuflecting to the “BIPOC”? Adding the racial component will cause more strife with the CoC, and it will be even more amusing to Skeptics watching this bat guano insane doomsday cult.
Our esteemed host wrote:
Abortion on demand, which black women demand at five times the rate of white women, and the black-on-black murder rate, are the white supremacists’ dream.
As for ‘BIPOC,’ or black, indigenous and people of color, how can this term not be considered homophobic and transphobic, since it excludes persons of minority sexual orientation and development?
Teach:
Margaret Sanger was not a racist. Margaret Sanger opposed abortion but supported widespread contraception. Margaret Sanger did not advocate reducing the population of Blacks and other non-white groups, although she WAS largely anti-immigration.
She DID advocate that people only have children they could afford and care for. Do you disagree?
She felt access to birth control was the best tool to support that outcome.
The claims of eugenics stemmed from the fact that she DID advocate that the severely mentally deficient NOT reproduce, advocating compulsory segregation or sterilization for the “profoundly retarded”.
In 1965, the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut that it was unconstitutional for the government to prohibit married couples from using birth control, but also in 1965, 26 states prohibited birth control for unmarried women.
The Democratic Party was the original conservative racist party, and Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. Fast forward to today and the Republican Party is the party for white, christian nationalism and the Democratic Party is the party for everyone else.
Again Rimjob hasn’t a clue about that which he writes.
And tries to rewrite history to boot.
He’s not very bright.
Bwaha! Lolgf
Fast forward to today and the former Democratic Party has morphed into an anti-American, anti-White, anti Christian den of atheists, communists, racists, fascists and globalists. What they call “White Christian Nationalism” is actually traditional American culture. Hate that and you hate America.
America has almost always welcomed people from all over the world to come and join us. For today’s demofascist “joining” us is not on the menu. They want to import non traditional people specifically to change us. They really hat America as it was founded and want to destroy it and turn it into another unlivable shit hole like like the countries their “preferred” immigrants come from.
If 90% of immigrants still came from England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany and the other Western nations The Elwood and people like him would be anti-immigrant. That’s a fact Jack! They have politicized immigration just like they do everything else from abortion to Wuhan Flu and look upon immigration not to build a better tomorrow for ALL Americans of ALL races and religions but as a cudgel to beat the life out of Whites and Christians.
The Democrat Party of old is the same as the fukin lousy racist bastards running it today except they are trying to integrate Hispanics into their cluster-fuk of racism. Instead of having Plantations they created Ghettos and now Barrios where they can keep their pets, feed them, house them, abort them, etc. until they need them to vote then bring them out as a display for how “tolerant” they are.
The demofascists have spent decades teaching blacks and now Hispanics (and we can see now how their tentacles of poison race hate is being inserted into the Asian communities) how to “hate Whitey” and blame White people for their own failures and inferiority. Instead of giving blacks a hand up the demofascists plan is always to give them a hand out and keep them right where they are, under their control.
People who call differences “inequities†and achievements “privilege†leave social havoc in their wake, while feeling noble about siding with the less fortunate. It would never occur to them that they have any responsibility for the harm done to both blacks and Hispanic and now Asian Americans.
However, now that the demofascists have perfected “The Art of the Steal” in elections the need for minority votes is diminished. Once they can create a vote of 80 million for a guy who spent 47 years in gvm’t without creating a fukin thing, spent his entire campaign hiding in his basement, had his biggest rally being about 500 supporters the need for their pets is looking bad. The demofascists now control everything. Let’s watch how they do. They belie their fear by surrounding themselves with the Army. Just like all fascists do.
Where do you think The Elwood and his fascist party are on this chart?
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/genoc.jpg
Abortion is legal in Israel and didn’t The Hews write th Bible ?
The Bible clearly states that if you cause an abortion you must only pay a fine of 2 shekels
Dana are you ok witty that ? I am
Show us where the Bible says that. Book, verse and line. I do not believe the word “abortion” appears in the Bible.
Hairy is an internet Troll that uses talking points he read somewhere.
He has little in the way of facts and certainly far less in the way of rationale for most anything he posts.
If he understood anything about Israel it is that the nation is basically a secular society.
Formally, it’s a secular democracy where Judaism is privileged; in reality, many orthodox Jews believe that Israel should be a theocratic state where Judaism is the supreme law of the land.
And:
The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel was approved by members of the Jewish community of Palestine and the Zionist movement. The documents first section sheds light on the relationship between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel.
It reads: “The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here, their spiritual, religious, and political identity was shaped.”
Circumstances under which abortion is approved
Under a 1977 abortion law, a TERMINATION COMMITTEE can approve an abortion, under sub-section 316a.
in the following circumstances:
The woman is younger than the legal marriage age in Israel (which currently is 18, raised from 17 in April 2013), or older than forty. (This was later amended to also include women under the age of twenty.)
The pregnancy was conceived under illegal circumstances (rape, statutory rape, etc.), in an incestuous relationship, or outside of marriage.
The fetus may have a physical or mental birth defect.
Continued pregnancy may put the woman’s life in risk, or damage her physically or mentally.
No different than in the United States other than in the USA there is no committee which oversees abortions. In ISRAEL the abortion rate is lower than the USA and the UK and most other industrialized nations.
Hence as I point out about sir Hairy. He lacks information, facts and is effectively a moron every time he posts something here.
Lets look at Hairy’s claim.
In Exodus the second book of the Old Testament we find in vs. 22-25.
22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[a] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
If you cause an abortion and the baby dies you are to be put to death. Not pay a 2 shekel fine.
Numbers 5:11-31 is another often misquoted and lied about passage from the bible about Abortion. Too long to quote. It is about a wife who has been unfaithful and abortion….In short abortion is a curse to the unfaithful not a get out of jail free card.
I could go on and on. There are about a dozen or so scriptures in the bible that discuss the concept of abortion while not actually using that word in the original Hebrew or Greek Text. In short none of them support Abortion and Abortion is considered a curse and not a blessing because during the time the bible was written women were property.
No different than the fact women did not even get the right to vote in the USA until the 20th century.
Again more disinformation from Hairy as he has read some abortion site that tries to use the bible to prove abortion is just fine by flat out lying about what the bible says and then hoping no one actually reads the bible and posits the truth.
In HOSEA we fine:
14Give them, LORD- what will you give them? Give them wombs that miscarry and breasts that are dry. 15″Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal, I hated them there. Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious. 16Ephraim is blighted, their root is withered, they yield no fruit. Even if they bear children, I will slay their cherished offspring.”
One only has to look at Africa today to see the results of this curse. Women who are starving and blighted and dying of thirst raise children who are bloated and dying of starvation. In Hosea we have the effects of a starving nation that has turned away from the CULTURAL NORMS it was raised to follow.
The results are clear. No where in the bible does God accept abortion in a positive light. The writings are clear the times in which the bible was written were harsh and life and death were truly a daily event for the children of Israel and the children of God.
As for JESUS? There is only one reference to pregnant women in the New Testament. Jesus came to show the world a new and better way. To avoid the pitfalls of the Traditions of the religions of the world. For there were many and each were filled with rituals and traditions which as I spoke of yesterday were to be guarded against. The 666 and the anti-Christ speak of Avoiding the pitfalls of Rituals and Traditions.
Matthew 24:19 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!
Here he is speaking of the end times or times in which famine and disaster are ruling the world. What mother would want to be with child when their is drought and famine?
I’m old enough to remember when Scientific American actually featured stories about Science instead of imaginary “social justice” issues.