Charles Einstein’s perspective on Climate Change in his book Climate - A New Story and its Importance
This blog was written by VCU student Arika Gray
Introduction
Charles Eisenstein is an environmentalist and published author and his book Climate - A New Story covers his outlook on climate change and the issues of how it’s approached. In his book, he asserts that solutions to climate change will come when society takes a step back and looks at the circumstances allowing the status quo to continue. The key to slowing the effects of climate change isn’t a combination of anecdotal actions, it is the reformation of the system sanctioning it. This means figuring out how to reconstruct the current systems in place to make protecting the environment from degradation a standard.
In order to unpack Charles Einsenstein’s Climate - A New Story, the reader must understand that there are two problems with the way the issue is handled today. One, climate change is a variety of issues within the environment caused by human proceedings and is birthed from circumstance. It isn’t just the annual rising of the global temperature or the level of carbon in the atmosphere, it’s a much more expansive issue with links in a variety of places. Two, climate change is not the most important issue that evades all other issues within society. Stating that climate change is the most important issue invalidates everyone with other concerns and only makes climate change more divisive. Stepping away from the fundamentalist view that climate change is the only, and most important, issue with a singular solution is the first step to looking for plausible answers. We must dig deeper and change the foundations that are conceding the climate to worsen.
Climate Change Through A Lens of Interbeing
Charles Eisenstein talks a lot about interbeing in his book. It’s the idea that everything is connected, and because of this what effects others also affects us. As humans, we have separated ourselves from the environment and the organisms around us. We value things based on their value or usefulness to us. This way of thinking is one the reasons climate change isn’t taken seriously. It’s simply not a standard for humans to care about the species around them. If we think of ourselves as distinct beings from the rest of the world around us, we won’t understand the full extent of the ramifications of a degraded environment. In order to make change, we must first take responsibility and care about the things around us.
Restoring the environment requires that we look at the world around us through a lens of interbeing. What we do effects the environment and the environment affects us, so it’s in the best interest of us to take care of it. Looking at things this way would change our ideals. Consequently, it would also change the way we look at the current system that we have in place and that would allow room for making strides towards a standard for sustainability. Charles Eisenstein insinuates that if we feel that what is happening to the environment is also having some sort of negative impact on ourselves, we will be further inclined to create change.
War Thinking and Its Consequences
In his book, Charles Eisenstein touches on what he calls “war thinking”. This is simply the thought of “I must pick a side”. This way of thought causes the issue of climate change to be a much more divisive issue than it truly is, and arguments containing this fallacy usually only skim the surface of what climate change really is. Too quickly we answer the obvious questions and look for a solution that only provides answers to the shallow parts of a problem. In order to create solutions for climate change we must break down the way the issue is thought about.
Today, the phrases “climate change” and “global warming” are used very closely together. While global warming and the rise of carbon dioxide present in the atmosphere are consequences of a changing climate, it’s important to recognize that climate change is a variety of issues. To think that climate change is only global warming would mean that stopping global warming is the same as stopping climate change. This obviously isn’t the case, so why would we frame it as so? To make the issue less divisive, it’s important to recognize the full extent of the problem. If we recognize that there are a variety of effects that fall under the category of climate change, we immediately recognize that there are a variety of causes. This means that if there are a multitude of causes, there are a multitude of small solutions that (if done by a large number of people) can make a substantial difference.
Circumstances and the Status Quo
Climate change is a result of the circumstances we all reside under, and to fix it we must change the circumstances enabling climate change to continue. We get too absorbed in the politicization of the issue, and too often point the finger at large corporations with the greatest carbon emissions. While carbon emissions are a part of climate change and they are a problem, people get so caught up in the actions of the larger businesses that they forget to take accountability for their actions that also worsen the climate. If we focus on blaming the large corporations that aren’t going to change, we think “we’re not as bad” and don’t make changes within our own lives. This results in the preservation of the status quo; the climate getting worse and no changes being made.
Asking questions such as, “What systems are in place that make it convenient to harm the environment?”, “What are things that I am doing that are enlarging my carbon footprint and how can I change the things that I am doing?”, “Why am I doing the things that I am doing?” will lead people to small solutions they can make in their everyday lives that can make a colossal difference if accomplished by a wide-range of people. Maintaining the status quo is about remaining stagnant. If we are all unmoving, nothing will get done.
Resources:
https://charleseisenstein.org/about/
https://charleseisenstein.org/books/climate-a-new-story/eng/which-side-am-i-on/