Beyond Nonpartisan Discourses: Radical Knowledge for Extreme Times

Marco Armiero

doi:10.46863/ecocene.44

Abstract

The majority of scientists agree on climate change and on the most daunting environmental problems humans are facing today. Moved by a commendable desire to contribute to the solution of these problems, several scientists have decided to speak up, telling the scientific truth about climate change to decision-makers and the public. Although appreciating the commitment to intervene in the public arena, I discuss some limits of these interventions. I argue that stating the reality of climate change does not prescribe any specific solution and sometimes it seems faint in distributing responsibilities. I ask whether unveiling/knowing the truth can be enough to foster radical transformations. Can knowledge move people towards transformative actions if power relationships do not change? Various environmental justice controversies prove that even when science is certain—and this is rarely the case in that kind of controversies—knowing might be not enough in the face of power structures preventing free choices and radical changes. In the end of my article, I state that it is fair to recognize that scientists have done their parts, and it is now up to social movements to foster the radical changes in power relationships that are needed for transforming societies.

Highlights

Marco Armiero is director of the Environmental Humanities Laboratory at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, where he is Associate Professor of Environmental History. He has been awarded the Barron Visiting Professor in Environmental Humanities from Princeton University. He works at the intersections of environmental humanities, environmental history, and political ecology, focusing on the politicization/depoliticization of the environment and the connections between social and environmental injustices
A cornerstone of my Ph.D. education was to avoid the “I” pronoun in my writing, a golden rule associated with the categorical prohibition to express—or perhaps to have—any political opinion
The authors refer to historical cases where scientists raised their voices to ask for radical changes in order to protect the basic means of human survival on Earth

Summary

Introduction

The authors refer to historical cases where scientists raised their voices to ask for radical changes in order to protect the basic means of human survival on Earth. My mind goes to people like Rachel Carson, the maritime biologist who turned into one of the most influential environmentalists of our times;2 Barry Commoner and his work on nuclear weapons and contamination (Egan 2007); or Alice Hamilton, less well known among environmentalists, a crucial figure for the development of industrial hygiene.3 In my research on environmental justice I have encountered several scientists who have chosen to use their knowledge and authority to support the struggles of grassroots organizations and affected communities.

Results

Conclusion