If you have been following the climate debate at all, you are bound to have heard the following arguments: « Everyone agrees that climate change is an urgent problem. We need to act now, or it will be too late. There really is no time for debate—the world is burning. »
If you have been following the climate debate at all, you are bound to have heard the following arguments: « Everyone agrees that climate change is an urgent problem. We need to act now, or it will be too late. There really is no time for debate—the world is burning. »
Is this kind of thinking only compounding our problems?
In a new article published in the journal Politiche Sociali, Professor Alexander Ruser at the University of Agder argues the connection between the green shift in the welfare state and risk of increased polarization.
« Historically, the welfare state could expand because the capitalist economies expanded. If capitalist expansion is becoming a problem, the welfare state has a problem. And that problem is becoming urgent, » says Ruser.
He sees a tension between functional arguments and normative arguments. The first kind are telling us that we must act now and reform the welfare state. The second kind are telling us that those that don’t agree are climate change deniers, lunatics or worse.
« Environmental reforms don’t impact everyone equally. Poverty complicates matters like investing in home insulation, shifting to a renewable energy provider, or buying an electric car, » he says.
