Could We Dare to Reimagine Politics?
Another "what if" question to ponder...
First, some quick updates…
Hello friends, I’ve made some updates to the newsletter structure that I hope you will enjoy. Moving forward, expect the following content in your inbox each week:
Thought of the week (something I’m pondering, and inviting you to do too)
Climate book tip of the week
Actions you can take (oh, isn’t it so empowering?)
Climate optimism to be aware of — YAY!
I hope you enjoy The Climate Optimist Newsletters. I’ve decided to keep them free and all I’m asking for is your love and feedback if you have any. Please like this post by clicking the heart, share it with a friend you think might like it, or leave a comment if something in here stirred up a thought!
I enjoy having you here — have a great, empowered, and optimistic day!
— Anne Therese
Thought of the week
An interesting thought has emerged with me lately. One that feels almost impossible to ever see in reality but, when you think about it, must be what all of us want deep down. I tested my thoughts in some recent social settings and the response from people was honestly quite profound — the smiling nods were many! What if we were to slow down politics?
Here’s my thinking. What if politicians found the courage to pause and publicly announce that the answers we’re looking for aren’t there yet? What if someone in power could say,
“This is an extremely unprecedented event we’re experiencing and, right now, we do not have all the answers. My party and I will take some time to think and reassess and make sure we listen to as many different opinions as possible to bring the best viable option to the table. We know action is urgent, but therefore, we want to make sure we don’t rush into the wrong solution. You may rest assured we’re putting all our available resources into the issue.”
In today’s political landscape, you can’t really afford to (publicly) act this way. Do and you run the risk of people losing trust in your ability to lead. Instead, politicians blast out answers to incredibly complex questions faster than they can breathe. This means that we live in a global political climate that runs more on afterthought than planful consideration.
That brings me to the next “What if…” question.
Would we trust someone in power who acted “slower”? Would we feel comfortable with a leader who truthfully said that he/she doesn’t yet know the best answer to the situation? Could we learn to live in this limbo of uncertainty while we trust people in power to figure it out?
My intuitive response to that is no, we do not feel comfortable with the “not knowing”, which is probably why this political “mansplaining” continues to exist.
Mansplaining
/ˈmanˌsplāniNG/
noun
the explanation of something by a man, typically to a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing.
With no intent to offend any men here, I’m using this as a simplified analogy of how politics work. We — the people — demand firm leadership and that is responded to by people in power who feel the need to always have the right thing to say. Preferably right now. There is very little room for extended reflection and even less patience from the public to trust someone who needs that time to reflect.
What serves to think deeply about is how much damage this is doing to society and world. How many decisions could’ve been made better with a bigger acceptance of reflection and thought? How much positive change can we create moving forward if those who have the power to make them didn’t feel constantly rushed to have all the answers?
I know this is a very simplified way of thinking of politics and, of course, there are many times when answers take years to surface. But the political facade of, “Trust us, we know what we’re doing”, is still there, isn’t it? If it weren’t, you wouldn’t be voted into the next election, and your time in power would soon be over, anyway.
In other words, know what to say to make people feel like you know what you’re doing, or soon you’ll be saying nothing at all.
What if…
…we were able to reimagine politics and slow down the speed of the decisions being made? What if we planted understanding and acceptance for transparent communication? A thoughtful approach that enables creativity and reimagination for incredibly complex issues like, let’s say climate change? (More on the need for reimagination in last week’s issue)
Could that political system exist? If so, what can we as people do to allow for that system to emerge? I will leave it there and let you ponder some of this for yourself…
If you like my newsletter, please remember to give it a little heart, it’s highly appreciated!
This Week’s Book Tip
Climate — A New Story was recommended to me during a Pachamama meeting in San Francisco back in 2017. “This book will change how you think about climate change,” I was told, and the person was right! Two summers ago I finally had the time to consume it in depth and let me tell you, there are a lot of underlining and notes e in this book!
Climate — A New Story is beautifully written in a way that challenges the reader to think about his/her perception of the world and the role we play in it. It was reading this book that I first came across the idea that my existence here on Earth doesn’t have to be about just minimizing my negative footprint, but about actively seeking ways to leave a footprint with meaning — a positive one!
Few reads have helped me understand my mission as a climate optimist more than this one and I couldn’t recommend it enough.
Author: Charles Eisenstein Publisher: North Atlantic Books I Find the book here
Take Action!
Shared by none less than Leonardo DiCaprio, this is an urgent and ongoing issue that you can partake in
“In Long Island, NY, residents, together with local organizations, Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr., and Suffolk County Legislator Bridget Fleming, are urging PSEG Long Island and Long Island Power Authority to cease its proposed plans to run a 5.2-mile underground power cable between its substations in Bridgehampton and East Hampton.
This right-of-way bisects the Long Pond Greenbelt, a roughly 800-acre expanse of coastal plain ponds, wetlands, and woods stretching from Sag Harbor to Sagaponack.”
Climate Optimism
Presented to you by our friends at Warp News and We Don’t Have Time
Diamond batteries – made out of nuclear waste – that could power equipment for years
A huge sand battery that stores energy – already up and running in Finland
A plastic alternative that breaks down into sugar - designed by researchers from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne
Colombia is planting giant corridors of trees to cool down the city and fight #climatechange
Want more fact-based optimistic news?
Warp News writes a weekly newsletter that focuses on fact-based optimism in science, technology, and human progress. Much of what they cover focuses on solutions that are solving climate change and driving impact towards a positive future. Sign up for Warp’s Free Weekly Newsletter
You just hit the nail on the head about why I'm reluctant to consider myself an environmentalist. The radicals just scream about how we must do SOMETHING. RIGHT.NOW!! without considering the ramifications of their actions. It often feels to me like we're constantly closing the barn door after the horse runs out. Case in point, the total ban on synthetic fertilizers in the Netherlands - clearly we need to regulate our nitrogen output, but to just slam a fist down and completely ban them with no alternatives was shortsighted at best. Generally things go sideways with an all or nothing approach, but sadly this is what the world seems to favor these days.
You just hit the nail on the head about why I'm reluctant to consider myself an environmentalist. The radicals just scream about how we must do SOMETHING. RIGHT.NOW!! without considering the ramifications of their actions. It often feels to me like we're constantly closing the barn door after the horse runs out. Case in point, the total ban on synthetic fertilizers in the Netherlands - clearly we need to regulate our nitrogen output, but to just slam a fist down and completely ban them with no alternatives was shortsighted at best. Generally things go sideways with an all or nothing approach, but sadly this is what the world seems to favor these days.