We’re old enough to remember reading science magazines in the library way back in the day, before they all became woke. We’ve covered a few examples: Nature found that assigning gender by the genitals one is born with “has no foundation in science.” When toppling statues was all the rage, Popular Mechanics published a guide to the best way to tear down statues that trigger you. And Scientific American looked into why white men stockpile guns, concluding that racial fears were a large contributor.
Now, as we’re learning that “climate variability” and not President Biden’s promise of a 100-day moratorium on deportations is what’s driving the massive surge of migrants to the southern border, Scientific American is doing its best to integrate climate change (and “climate anxiety”) to the anti-racist movement. The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf has a look:
I haven't seen whiteness madlibs journalism filled out in quite this way before.
"Racism is not an accidental byproduct of environmentalism; it has been a constant reference point."
https://t.co/uu5UQvV3bT— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
People of color are "most concerned" about climate change (a citation would be nice).and that "interest in climate anxiety" (apparently measured by the author's perception of interest in her book) is overwhelmingly white. How these concepts are defined seems important. pic.twitter.com/PcUyiKA3Zj
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
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?
Not to nitpick, but a jury hasn’t even been seated yet to determine if George Floyd was murdered. And the storming of the U.S. Capitol has her deeply concerned about the racial implications of climate anxiety?
But no clarity, and then we come to this: "The white response to climate change is literally suffocating to people of color." Literally? Suffocating? How? To whom? I guess the next sentence attempts some answers:
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
"Climate anxiety can operate like white fragility, sucking up all the oxygen in the room and devoting resources toward appeasing the dominant group." Unfortunately, the other side of that simile is as ill-defined. And:
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
If the article is correct that people of color are most concerned about and hurt most by climate change shouldn't devoting resources to it help people of color and make them happy rather than "literally" "suffocating" them? This is Scientific American!
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
I do agree with this sentence: "Intense emotions mobilize people, but not always for the good of all life on this planet."
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) March 22, 2021
"Unbearable Whiteness of X" rarely sticks the landing
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) March 22, 2021
Whoa, the headline in this link is different from the article (which doesn't mention "whiteness" at all).
Did they change it?
But also, strange article.
— Dr. Mansa Keita (@rasmansa) March 22, 2021
“The white response to climate change is literally suffocating to people of color.”
Hmm. I have missed the news reports of white progressive environmentalists murdering people of color by suffocation. Not surprised tho.
— David Battan (@davidmbattan) March 22, 2021
"The white response to climate change is literally suffocating to people of color." LITERALLY. Suffocating.
— Liz Ray Moore (@Lizzie26097961) March 22, 2021
I'm not anxious about climate change at all. Breathe easier people of color.
— Liz Ray Moore (@Lizzie26097961) March 22, 2021
Anytime you see an article saying that "people are concerned" or "worried" or "anxious", bear in mind that it's going to be an even smaller subset of politically engaged people, and the politically engaged are at most 15% of the population.
— Avoid crowds, especially indoors (@sclayworth) March 22, 2021
And keep in mind that the mainstream media has a vested interest in keeping “climate anxiety” alive among that 15 percent who watch their programs.
Ludicrous from start to finish. This is pure ideology, not “following the science.”
— howardrgold (@howardrgold1) March 22, 2021
Editor: I don't understand what any of this says
Sarah: It's about racism
Editor: Ah that's cool then! Publish it!
— Ministry of Truth (@minitruegov) March 22, 2021
This person gives college lectures and this is published in a science Magazine? What’s going on?
— Ronny Siev (@RonnySiev) March 22, 2021
None of this discourse seems remotely helpful to anyone. The article boils down to "Feel bad about feeling bad about something that you should feel bad about."
— Matt MGS (@wahoomatt) March 22, 2021
We're simply in a moral panic, where guilty white liberals labor to create the spectacle of helping to absolve their privilege.
…without actually helping anyone or inconveniencing themselves.
— Steve Faktor (@ideafaktory) March 22, 2021
translation: too many white people care about the environment, and that’s racist. Also, if you’re not freaking out about the environment (and you’re white), yup you’re also a racist.
— austin erasmus (@lutherasmus1517) March 22, 2021
Is there some competition on who can write the dumbest thing ever? I hope in the future, people look back on these ridiculous articles and laugh. Right now it's too cringe worthy to laugh at like we should.
— Bolabados Balboa (@swishawoodlands) March 22, 2021
We've come full circle.
— Chad Ten (@ten_chad) March 22, 2021
My theory is we all died because of acid rains int the 80's and this is a simulation.
— Eric Ciaramella (@realOvenDodger) March 22, 2021
I think there is nothing as narcissistic as a global warming supporter. They are looking at 50 years of measurements and saying "OMG, HUMANS BAD" while forgetting that humans have only been around for 200K years and the Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years.
— War Machine (@OneMoreBrian) March 22, 2021
We always want to ask: During which year out of the past 4.5 billion or so was the earth at the “correct” temperature?
Related:
Scientific American puts objectivity aside and endorses Joe Biden because ‘the 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death’ https://t.co/Ch7Ine8MWk
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 15, 2020
Join the conversation as a VIP Member