In recent years, as advocates, agencies, and governments have grappled with the problem of how to respond to the climate crisis, scholars and journalists have undertaken a debate over the most effective means to persuade the general public that a concerted response is needed—a debate, that is, over climate rhetoric. From one perspective comes the argument that citizens need to be confronted with the imminent devastation of climate change, and so jarred from their complacencies and doubts. From another comes the rejoinder that an emphasis on threats and dangers is inherently immobilizing, and that audiences should instead be empowered through an optimistic, hopeful message. This essay considers a prominent example of each approach, endorsing their dual utility before emphasizing the greater importance of individual efficacy. Rhetorical scholars are asked to lend their expertise to the effort locally, wherever they are based. The En-ROADS Climate Simulator, developed at MIT, is recommended as a useful communication tool.
Key words: Climate Change, Environment, Capitalism, Future, En-ROADS
|
