Culture and Climate

     Diversity, equity, and inclusion have become some of the most common words on people’s lips the last few months, at least in America. But, despite the massive questions about the future of diversity, equity, and inclusion that have been posed in recent times, you may now also wonder why the subject of culture is even together here with the issue of climate change. The truth is, however, culture and climate are incredibly connected, and protecting one is to protect the other.

     This story starts in the sixteenth century. Colonialism is a common topic these days, but often it’s not fully explained. I’ll explain the connection between colonies in the past and “neocolonialism” in the present here.

Beginning in the 16th century, many countries—mainly European—began to seek riches and honor by traveling across the oceans to other lands, and when they got there, they tended to ravage the land of its resources and exploit its people. We attribute this to racism, but we have to remember that prejudice is not natural but it is something that is taught. Specifically, countries that participated in this expansion of their state called “imperialism” justified it to their governments and population through the use of two main concepts: the “White Man’s Burden” and Social Darwinism. Both of these came later than the 16th century as colonies were already established and conquerors needed support to maintain their foreign control.

     The “White Man’s Burden” comes from an 1899 poem by Rudyard Kipling addressing the Philippine-American War, in which Kipling supports the American government’s attempts to conquer and assert control over the Philippines and the Filipino people by stating that Caucasian people have a calling to go out and “civilize” the supposed “savages” that lived in foreign, non-American areas. By no means is Kipling correct; no person can be more or less “civilized” based on their ethnicity, however we can note how he attempts to justify American actions of killing innocent people in an effort to assume more power. This will become important later. This concept is also similar and related to “Manifest Destiny”, the thought that the American people supposedly had a right to expand westward across North America and in doing so commit mass genocide and forceful relocation of native peoples. These are both examples of ideologies that attempt to spur up action and support for Caucasian people’s expansion and murder of people of color by using supposed Caucasian ethnic superiority over other people groups.

     Social Darwinism is a similar idea that comes from a misuse of Darwin’s theory of evolution. In tandem with the belief that other people were somehow less civilized, some colonizers attempted to argue that people of color, specifically Africans, were genetically “less evolved” than Europeans. This is not a sound argument as humans are capable of love, of surviving despite various genetic differences, and of having complex thoughts and emotions; therefore, humans do not follow the “reproduce with the most strong candidate” law that informs Darwin’s theory, nor do they follow that only the stronger (more fit) genes become passed on.

     These ideas reinforced the idea that certain groups of people were more—or uniquely—fit to rule over others, control them, and exploit them. The trickle down of these ideas through the general European public over the next century would plant the seeds that form American racism and discrimination today. Discrimination also comes from many other different sources, especially in non-European countries that were not exposed to these ideas, for example, beauty standards informing colorism in East Asia.

     Fast forward to the modern day. These same ideas are the same ones used today to justify hurting our environment and exploiting marginalized communities. That it is somehow the human destiny to take from the world for a person’s own idealized life; that we have the right to sacrifice others’ rights and lives for our own comfort. We don’t.

     So, ultimately, protecting culture—protecting the equality of life and opportunity that discrimination seeks to destroy—is to protect against the exploitation of nature. Protecting the traditions of native people that were the original sustainability. Protecting the spaces and rights of queer people. The autonomy and humanity of women. And the safety of people in places in a state of conflict. Protecting culture lets us form a shield to defend against the flames that try to burn the strings tying us together. When we see how different we are, we see how similar we are. How human we are. And that is the key to organizing change: to see ourselves as different but the same, to understand each other, and to form one movement that fights for all.