Words and Narratives

Tweet The BBC news last night reported that Cameron would be "heading to Europe" this week to give his much-vaunted speech on the "relationship between the UK and the EU".  The BBC seems to have fallen into the trap of adopting the Eurosceptic narrative which is coming to predominate in the Tory party.

To be heading "to" somewhere, you can't be there already; the phrase conveys the clear message that Europe is "somewhere else"; an external place of which the UK is not really a part.  It's not true geographically, but it seems to be true culturally for many - and not just the Tory sceptics.  The use of this terminology subtly reinforces that message.

In similar vein, talking about the relationship between the UK and the EU verbally externalizes the EU as something "other"; again reinforcing one particular narrative.  It's no surprise that the other EU states react with disbelief and scorn; the narrative may play well with its domestic target audience, but it inevitably sounds arrogant and aloof from the perspective of the other EU members.

There's nothing at all wrong with a member of any club seeking to change the rules of the club by agreement with fellow members.  But Cameron and his ilk succeed in giving the impression that they aren't really interested in putting the effort into doing that.  What they seem to want, rather, is a whole new category of membership which applies to only one member of the club and which gives that member all of the perceived pluses and none of the perceived minuses.

One would have to be an extremely highly valued member of any club to pull that off, and I see no sign in this instance that the other members believe that retaining the UK as a nominal member is so important that they're prepared to suspend some of the obligations of membership.

The EU isn't perfect, by a long way.  There are changes I'd like to see as well.  But, as with any other club, members need to decide whether they want to work with others to achieve those changes or whether they want to quit.  Cameron's posturing, in an attempt to appease his own party, is simply moving the UK closer to the exit.

The underlying problem is that many in the UK establishment haven't really got their heads round the change in the UK's status.  The Empire has long gone, and there are no longer any European 'Great Powers'.  Perhaps a break-up of the UK into its constituent nations would be the greatest favour we could do these people, by forcing them, at long last, to start facing a few realities.

Weathering the weather

Tweet In many ways, I wasn't overly surprised a week or so ago to find that the proportion of people who don't believe that man-made climate change is either happening or is a problem has increased. The controversy over the leaked e-mails didn't help, but there are a number of deeper issues as well.

1. There is a general lack of understanding about the difference between weather and climate. Many climate change campaigners haven't really helped by drawing attention to weather events as evidence for climate change. There were always going to be weather events which sceptics could then use against them.

2. Humans are, in general, not very good at thinking about the longer term impact of their behaviour. Evolution has fitted us well to look for immediate individual survival, but not for collective species survival. We have an innate tendency towards short termism. Those who will suffer short term economic disadvantage by any proposed measures have a natural inbuilt propensity to be willing to believe whatever justifies their own decisions as well.

3. The internet makes it easy to spread 'junk science' and plain old fashioned error. Repetition can give that a credibility which is wholly undeserved.

4. Climate change is complex. It depends on understanding probabilities rather then certainties. Lack of certainty can easily become lack of good reason to act.

5. Politicians have an electoral incentive to avoid giving people really bad news about changes that we need to make unless and until they can all agree to say the same thing (or until hell freezes over, a rather likelier event) for fear that another politician or party will give a message which people might prefer to hear.

6. Large companies and organisations most threatened by climate change have the muscle and the money to fund 'research' which 'proves' that there is no problem.

When asked, at a hustings meeting during the last election, whether I am an optimist or a pessimist on climate change, I replied that I am a pessimist. Not because I believe that we can't do enough to avoid the problem, but because I believe that we probably won't. That isn't a reason to give up trying though.

I've long been convinced that the biggest single change that we can make is in our use of, and our sourcing of, energy. It's easier (or maybe just less difficult) to convince people that we should switch to renewable sources than it is to talk about lifestyle changes. Perhaps we should try and concentrate the argument more tightly on that main issue.