Paper Short Abstract:

If human comprehension fails to grasp the hyperobject climate change, is the result inaction due to unwritability? I draw from the French Revolution, time of momentous societal change, to explore structures, which contribute to separation from nature paradigm. I ask how it could be rewritten.

Paper Abstract:

Climate (in)action is arguably the most important question of our time. Post-humanist Timothy Morton has suggested that humanity has entered an era where its actions upon the planet are becoming visible. The question of climate change is, justly, painted as a huge problem, further accentuated by a succession of failed international organisational action, outdated environmental laws, and greenwashing by multinational companies bolstered by governments. Has the narrative surrounding wicked problems made them insurmountable to the point of resignation and indifference among humankind?

Recent poll by Earth4All and Global Commons Alliance suggests otherwise. It found that majority of the citizens of G20 countries (excluding Russia) support climate action. Yet, there is variation within the group, and in addition, 26% of people are unengaged, 13% climate sceptics. I am curious as to how these different groupings could be reached to engage people in climate action.

I draw from my research in Cultural History – work in progress – on societal interaction and development of rights in the aftermath of the French Revolution. The bourgeois became citizens, citizens became consumers, what would make consumers into activists? Structures, such as colonialism, capitalism, and consumer culture guide behaviour and feed into the limits and possibilities perceived by actors. I look at the historical structures at play in climate crisis dating back to the Enlightenment to see how they impact modern empathy-dilemma.