Tapar el sol con un dedo (de frente) Sobre las entrañas culturales del negacionismo climático contemporáneo
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2021-07-05
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Resumen
¿Cómo se genera la ideología que niega la existencia del cambio climático? ¿A qué corrientes
políticas está asociada? En esta tesis, me propongo analizar cómo se gesta y sostiene el
negacionismo climático, una forma de pensar devenida en una práctica política y cultural.
Sostengo que no surge por generación espontánea, sino que está entroncado con tradiciones
políticas vigentes, como el pensamiento conservador, y que procura asentarse en el
escenario global sobre la base de una idea central: expandir la sensación de que la falta de
certidumbre sobre el fenómeno es el problema principal.
Para corroborar esta hipótesis, utilizaré distintas rutas de análisis, como el dispositivo, de
Giorgio Agamben; la tecnología del poder, de Michel Foucault; el ensayo de Alan Badiou
sobre qué significa un acontecimiento (el cambio climático lo es); y los estudios de Slavoj
Žižek acerca de lo que significa la razón cínica. También examinaré la propuesta de Bruno
Latour sobre por qué nos encontramos en un Nuevo Régimen Climático, resistido por los
negacionistas, y los lazos existentes entre empresas, think tanks y actores políticos para
afianzar el negacionismo climático.
En el primer capítulo, procuro explicar cómo los estudios sobre el cambio climático van
transitando desde lo científico hacia lo social y político, y cómo, ante el surgimiento de
corrientes que comienzan a negarlo, irrumpen grupos de científicos que proponen que la
ciencia ya no sea neutral. Para tal fin, exploraré las concepciones sobre naturaleza y cultura
propuestas por los investigadores Morris Berman y Bruno Latour. Además, haré un recuento
histórico del papel que jugaron personajes como Rachel Carson y Charles Keeling, quienes
fueron de los primeros en alertar a la sociedad humana sobre el deterioro del ecosistema
global e intentan provocar reacciones en el ámbito político.
En el segundo capítulo, me propongo explorar cómo, al igual que cualquier estrategia de
poder, el negacionismo climático requiere de objetos culturales que le ayuden a sostener su
influencia. Con ese fin, analizaré tres soportes de la comunicación humana: el primero es el
libro Planeta Azul, no verde. ¿Qué está en peligro, el clima o la libertad?, del ex presidente
checo Václav Klaus; el segundo es el documental La gran farsa del calentamiento global, del
productor británico Martin Durkin; y el tercero es el portal de noticias Libertad Digital. Los sugerentes estudios de Terry Eagleton sobre cómo se construye una ideología y de Slavoj
Žižek sobre la ‘razón cínica’ (“saben que lo hacen, pero igual lo hacen”) sostendrán el
análisis.
Finalmente, en el tercer capítulo, sostengo que, en el ámbito político, han aparecido ya varios
personajes ⎯e incluso mandatarios⎯ que han incorporado el negacionismo climático como
parte del pensamiento conservador. Para analizar los discursos políticos negacionistas,
utilizaré la teoría de la cognición cultural, del profesor Dan Kahan, de la Universidad de Yale;
el trabajo de Naomi Klein, en su libro Esto lo cambia todo (2014); y Políticas climáticas, de
Anthony Giddens (2011). También emplearé los ensayos de Andrew Hoffman y Maxwell
Boykoff sobre la cultura inherente al discurso negacionista climático.
How is the ideology that denies the existence of climate change generated? What political currents is it associated with? In this thesis, I propose to analyze how climate denialism is developed and expanded, a way of thinking that has become a political and cultural practice. I argue that it does not arise by spontaneous generation, but is connected with current political traditions, such as conservative thought. And that seeks to settle on the global scene based on a central idea: to spread the belief that the lack of certainty about the phenomenon is the main issue. To test this hypothesis, I intend to make use of different categories of analysis, such as Giorgio Agamben’s ‘device’, Michel Foucault’s ‘technology of power’, Alan Badiou’s essay on what an ‘event’ means (climate change) and Slavoj Žižek’s studies on what ‘cynical reason’ means. I will also examine Bruno Latour's proposal on why we are facing a 'New Climate Regime', which is resisted by deniers, and the ties that exist between companies, think tanks and political actors to strengthen climate denialism. In the first chapter, more precisely, I proceed to explain how studies on climate change have moved from the scientific to the social and political scenario, and how, faced with the emergence of currents that begin to deny it, groups of scientists break in and propose that science is no longer so neutral. To this end, the conceptions of nature and culture proposed by researchers Morris Berman and Bruno Latour will be explored. I will also make a historical account of the role played by characters like Rachel Carson and Charles Keeling, who are among the first to alert human society about the deterioration of the global ecosystem and who tried to provoke reactions within the political arena. In Chapter II, I set out to explore how, like any strategy of power, climate denialism requires cultural objects to help it sustain its influence. To that end, three objects installed on different supports of human communication will be analyzed: the book Blue Planet in Green Shackles. What is Endangered: Climate or Freedom? from former Czech President Václav Klaus; the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, by British producer Martin Durkin; and the news portal Libertad Digital. The suggestive studies of Terry Eagleton on how an ideology is built, and of Slavoj Žižek on ‘cynical reason’ (“they know what they are doing, but they do it anyway”), will support this analysis. Finally, in Chapter III I argue that, within the political sphere, several characters have already appeared, and even leaders, who have incorporated climate denialism as part of conservative thinking. To analyze denialist political discourses, I use Professor Dan Kahan's ‘Cultural Cognition’ theory, the work of Naomi Klein in her book This Changes Everything (2014) as well as the book The Politics of Climate Change by Anthony Giddens (2011). Also the essays by Andrew Hoffman and Maxwell Boykoff on the culture inherent in climate denialist discourse.
How is the ideology that denies the existence of climate change generated? What political currents is it associated with? In this thesis, I propose to analyze how climate denialism is developed and expanded, a way of thinking that has become a political and cultural practice. I argue that it does not arise by spontaneous generation, but is connected with current political traditions, such as conservative thought. And that seeks to settle on the global scene based on a central idea: to spread the belief that the lack of certainty about the phenomenon is the main issue. To test this hypothesis, I intend to make use of different categories of analysis, such as Giorgio Agamben’s ‘device’, Michel Foucault’s ‘technology of power’, Alan Badiou’s essay on what an ‘event’ means (climate change) and Slavoj Žižek’s studies on what ‘cynical reason’ means. I will also examine Bruno Latour's proposal on why we are facing a 'New Climate Regime', which is resisted by deniers, and the ties that exist between companies, think tanks and political actors to strengthen climate denialism. In the first chapter, more precisely, I proceed to explain how studies on climate change have moved from the scientific to the social and political scenario, and how, faced with the emergence of currents that begin to deny it, groups of scientists break in and propose that science is no longer so neutral. To this end, the conceptions of nature and culture proposed by researchers Morris Berman and Bruno Latour will be explored. I will also make a historical account of the role played by characters like Rachel Carson and Charles Keeling, who are among the first to alert human society about the deterioration of the global ecosystem and who tried to provoke reactions within the political arena. In Chapter II, I set out to explore how, like any strategy of power, climate denialism requires cultural objects to help it sustain its influence. To that end, three objects installed on different supports of human communication will be analyzed: the book Blue Planet in Green Shackles. What is Endangered: Climate or Freedom? from former Czech President Václav Klaus; the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, by British producer Martin Durkin; and the news portal Libertad Digital. The suggestive studies of Terry Eagleton on how an ideology is built, and of Slavoj Žižek on ‘cynical reason’ (“they know what they are doing, but they do it anyway”), will support this analysis. Finally, in Chapter III I argue that, within the political sphere, several characters have already appeared, and even leaders, who have incorporated climate denialism as part of conservative thinking. To analyze denialist political discourses, I use Professor Dan Kahan's ‘Cultural Cognition’ theory, the work of Naomi Klein in her book This Changes Everything (2014) as well as the book The Politics of Climate Change by Anthony Giddens (2011). Also the essays by Andrew Hoffman and Maxwell Boykoff on the culture inherent in climate denialist discourse.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Cambios climáticos--Aspectos ambientales, Cambios climáticos--Aspectos políticos, Cambios climáticos--Aspectos sociales
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este artículo se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess