Politicians in Conservative, Rural USA Hinder Freedom

by Daniel Brouse

Politicians in conservative, rural parts of the USA have often hindered progress in the fight against climate change due to several reasons:

1. Denial of Climate Science

Many conservative politicians in rural areas deny the existence or severity of climate change, dismissing it as a hoax or exaggerated. This denial stems from skepticism about scientific consensus and the influence of fossil fuel industries.

• Example: Some politicians have publicly questioned the validity of climate science, which undermines efforts to implement necessary policies to address climate change .

2. Legislative Actions

Conservative lawmakers have taken legislative actions that block or roll back environmental regulations. This includes efforts to:

• Weaken EPA Regulations: Attempting to reduce the power and funding of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is responsible for enforcing environmental laws and regulations .
• Oppose Renewable Energy Initiatives: Blocking or limiting subsidies and incentives for renewable energy projects such as wind and solar power, which are essential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions .

3. Support for Fossil Fuels

Many conservative politicians support the fossil fuel industry, which is a significant contributor to climate change. This support manifests in various ways:

• Subsidies and Tax Breaks: Providing substantial subsidies and tax breaks to coal, oil, and gas companies, making it financially easier for them to continue their operations .
• Blocking Clean Energy Legislation: Opposing legislation that aims to reduce carbon emissions or promote clean energy alternatives. This includes resisting carbon pricing mechanisms like carbon taxes or cap-and-trade systems .

4. Cultural and Economic Factors

In many rural areas, fossil fuel industries are major employers and economic contributors. Politicians in these regions often prioritize short-term economic gains over long-term environmental benefits.

• Job Protection: Fear of job losses in coal mining, oil drilling, and related industries leads politicians to resist policies that might threaten these jobs, despite the potential for green jobs in renewable energy sectors .
• Cultural Identity: There is a strong cultural attachment to traditional industries and a skepticism towards perceived “elite” climate policies that are seen as disconnected from rural realities .

5. Public Opinion

Public opinion in many conservative, rural areas tends to be less supportive of climate change policies compared to urban or liberal areas. Politicians often reflect the views of their constituents.

• Voter Pressure: Politicians face pressure from their voter base to oppose climate action, particularly when climate policies are framed as harmful to the local economy or way of life .

Conclusion

The combination of climate change denial, legislative actions that favor fossil fuels, cultural and economic priorities, and public opinion in conservative, rural areas of the USA has significantly hindered progress in the fight against climate change. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including education, economic transition plans for affected communities, and bipartisan cooperation to develop sustainable solutions.

The Need for Urgency

Previous climate models have inadequately incorporated “social-ecological systems” as human involvement was not a significant factor in past climate changes. Regrettably, the United States ranks among the least prepared countries globally, with the highest percentage of climate deniers. The Republican party dismisses it as a manufactured crisis and plans to increase fossil fuel production, exacerbating the situation. Political extremists asserting that the climate crisis is manufactured employ an ironic term, considering that human manufacturing activities are the primary driver of climate change. Both political parties have concurred to allocate unlimited emergency funding for climate disasters instead of proactively preventing them. Last year, the US witnessed a record number of over a billion-dollar climate disasters, totaling 28 separate weather and climate-related events. It is due to this arrogance and ignorance that “worst-case scenarios” are now “best-case scenarios” for the acceleration of climate change. These factors have altered our climate model, shifting the projected maximum temperature rise from 4 degrees Celsius over the next millennium to a probable increase of 9 degrees Celsius this century.

Human-induced climate change is a dynamic component of an intricate and unordered system, as per chaos theory. This implies that global warming is accelerating exponentially in a complex manner. Over the period from 1992 to 2023, we have presented compelling evidence, proposed remedies to mitigate climate change, and amassed valuable information through the engagement of millions with this climate model. Your participation has been invaluable. The incontrovertible data underscores that human-induced climate change is rapidly deteriorating our habitat.

Our climate model / experiment employs chaos theory to comprehensively consider human impacts and projects a potential global average temperature increase of 9℃ above pre-industrial levels. Global warming is a consequence of elevated thermal energy in the climate system, which comprises various subsystems. Chaos theory underscores the intricate and nonlinear nature of dynamic systems. Human well-being is compromised above a 1.5-degree temperature rise, rendering much of the Earth uninhabitable. A 9-degree Celsius increase would bring the Earth close to a wet-bulb temperature incapable of sustaining human life.

References

1. National Geographic. Climate Change Denial.
2. The Guardian. EPA Regulations.
3. Forbes. Renewable Energy Policies.
4. Center for American Progress. Fossil Fuel Subsidies.
5. The New York Times. Public Opinion and Climate Policies.

The Human Induced Climate Change Experiment