Essay by Eric Worrall
“… when I discuss climate change with people who are older than me, the general response is to … feel angry and betrayed by their lack of involvement, considering that they contributed to the world we now live in.’ …”
‘Listen to me!’: Young people’s experiences of talking about emotional impacts of climate change
Charlotte A. Jones
Chloe Lucas University of Tasmania School of Geography, Planning, and Spatial Sciences, Australia
Received 23 December 2022, Revised 21 July 2023, Accepted 30 August 2023, Available online 16 September 2023, Version of Record 16 September 2023.
Highlights
- •Results of a large national Australian survey of young people (15–19 years)
- •High concern, worry, powerlessness, and frustration about climate change.
- •Respondents most commonly talked to friends about climate change feelings.
- •Feeling listened to predicted talking about climate change feelings.
- •Differences in emotions when talking to different generations were evident.
- •Young people need respect, opportunities to act, and shared understanding.
Abstract
The emotional significance of climate change for young people is becoming recognised. However, their experiences of talking about these feelings are not well understood, despite being acknowledged as an important avenue for support and social change. This article reports on a survey of 1,943 young people aged 15–19 years living in Australia. The survey examined their level of concern about climate change, the feelings they associate with climate change, whom they talk to about these feelings, under what conditions, and with what effects. Respondents reported a high level of concern about climate change, most associated with feelings of worry, powerlessness, and frustration. Friends were most trusted to share these feelings with, followed by parents/guardians and then teachers. The most important predictor of young people talking about their climate feelings was whether they felt listened to. Respondents were more likely to feel comfortable having climate conversations with younger or same-aged people and associated these conversations with hope. In contrast, climate conversations with older people were most often associated with betrayal, uncertainty, and worry. Through open-ended responses, the young people surveyed called for further respect and consideration of their views, opportunities to drive action and lead climate conversations, and a need for shared understanding of the issues at stake. Our findings highlight opportunities for those who care about and interact with young people to help them come to terms with the challenges of living in a changing climate through listening and creating safe spaces for what can be difficult discussions.
…
When talking with older people about climate change, nearly half of respondents expressed they felt betrayed (49.4%). This was supported in respondents’ open-ended reflections with one stating ‘when I discuss climate change with people who are older than me, the general response is to nod and smile and then change the subject which makes me feel angry and betrayed by their lack of involvement, considering that they contributed to the world we now live in.’ 38.5% of respondents said that when they talked to people older than them they felt uncertain, and 32.4% said they felt worried. This uncertainty and worry could be directed towards climate change, or about the direction and form of the conversation. As one participant described, ‘talking with people older than myself can be a mixed bag, it’s unsettling.’ Only a small percentage of respondents felt encouraged (15.3%), comfortable (13.5%), hopeful (11.9%) and safe (6.1%) when talking with older people. For those who did experience these feelings, open-ended responses indicated this was related to being supported and learning from older people: ‘I feel when talking about climate change to older people, I become more informed of the situation.’.
…
One key avenue through which the findings of this study could be enacted is within education structures, offering opportunities for changing intergenerational relationships through student–teacher interactions. While less than half of the respondents of this study shared their feelings about climate change with their teachers, it was clear from our findings that participants who felt regularly listened to by their teachers were more likely to talk to them about their emotions. Further, high perceived teacher concern about climate change was also a significant factor in increasing the likelihood of these conversations. …
…
Studies have demonstrated how cultures of silence and silencing work to produce and cultivate maladaptive behaviours and denial (Verlie, 2022, Norgaard, 2011). Conversely, to offer young people the opportunity to talk about climate change in open, non-judgemental conversation, and most importantly to listen, rather than seek to reframe their perspective, is to offer them power to adapt and respond to the crisis they face. …
…
Read more: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378023001103?via%3Dihub
To her credit, the author admitted that the sample in her study was possibly biased, because “… the survey was based on a non-representative and convenience sample which may have led to a higher proportion of respondents who are concerned about climate change and engaged in climate action.”.
What does the study tell us?
I get a strong impression that young people who participated in the study think talking to older people about climate change is intolerable, if the older people do anything which remotely challenges their climate beliefs. Even nodding, smiling and trying to change the subject is enough to arouse feelings of betrayal. Young climate fanatics demand complete attention, submission and enthusiastic affirmation, otherwise they “feel betrayed”.
Nobody, including the author, asked why older people are frequently so dismissive of climate concerns, why they don’t express concern at the same intensity as young people, and the most absurd precept, the implicit believe that the climate education process is only supposed to go one way, from the younger people to the older.
The author and the participants appear to have completely ignored or discounted the possibility they might learn something new, if they do some listening, instead of insisting on doing all the talking.
One thing is very clear, this intense anger and sense of betrayal seems about as far as you can get from mutual tolerance and respect for others, which underpins Western democracy and civil society.
We all have fun laughing at the climate snowflakes getting offended at their own shadows, but then I had a disturbing thought.
Was the Chinese Communist Revolution an explosion of mob violence perpetrated by a group of left wing Maoist snowflakes?
Did the students who stormed the schools and universities, dragging teachers into the street and beating them to death, genuinely believe they were delivering righteous justice to traitors? “Traitors” being defined as anyone who gave the slightest hint of less than absolute devotion to the Maoist ideals embraced by the students?
How do we convince today’s young fanatics that they don’t have all the answers, that sometimes they need to listen to the experience and opinions of others? How do we convince them to not blind themselves with irrational feelings of hurt and betrayal, when in the presence of someone who doesn’t completely share all of their beliefs?
How do we shore up the foundations of our freedoms, by ensuring our young people learn tolerance and respect for others? Values which were so universal in our youth, it never occurred to us such values might be lost to future generations?
I think we need answers to these questions, and fast, before something terrible happens.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sadly, they are bombarded with climate propaganda daily. I have just heard on the radio news that the (pretty normal) summer we have had in the UK but which has resulted in an excellent crop of grapes for winemakers, is the result of “climate change”. We had a warm and sunny May/June for the flowers then a cool and wet July/ August which swelled the fruit. Sweet FA to do with climate change.
Why has the public bought into the current rhetoric “lock, stock, and barrel” to STOP THE USE OF FOSSIL FUELS, which simulates the resurrection of the 1978 mass murder-suicide of religious cult members of the Peoples Temple, led by Jim Jones, Jonestown, Guyana?
In September 2023 , 45 years after the Jim Jones tragedy in Jonestown, President Biden used his executive power to establish the American Climate Corps, which will employ and train 20,000 young people in the work of climate resilience without fossil fuels.
When I watch the TV coverage of protesters, both politicians and teenagers, carrying signs to STOP THE USE OF FOSSIL FUELS, what I SEE on those posters is:
RID THE WORLD OF AIRPORTS, JETS, SHIPS, SPACE PROGRAMS, AND STOP SOCIAL MEDIA, AND THE PRODUCTION OF CELLPHONES, COMPUTERS, and PORCELAIN TOILETS that are dependent on the derivatives manufactured from crude oil!!
As John Stossel so often said, “give-me-a-break”!
But everything they do to build resilience will require FF to do!
They probably don’t know that the cost of stopping warming by 2050 has been estimated to be $US 200 Trillion with a T and that families in developed countries will have to spend about $1 million each or about $33,000 per year for 30 years, and that may not work depending.on how the Sun acts.
They probably don’t know that the Sun is entering a Grand Solar Minimum and the Sunspot Number is forecast to start dropping starting in 2025 and to drop to single digits in 2031 and to zero in 2040 when the forecast ends. Sunspots are associated with hotter areas and more solar output and fewer sunspots mean less solar output and a colder Earth.
They probably don’t know that around 10 times as many people die from cold weather as from hot weather because of increased strokes and heart attacks caused by blood vessels constricting to save heat.
They probably don’t know that the Earth is in a 2.56 million ice age named the Quaternary Glaciation in a warmer period called an interglacial period that usually lasts about 10,000 years and alternates with cold glacial periods that usually last 90,000 years and so far this interglacial period has lasted 11,700 years, so a cold glacial period may start at any time.
It might be a good idea to start by asking why warmer is so bad that it’s a harbinger of catastrophe.
The worst-case alarmist scenarios predict warming of 4°F over the next century. That’s less than the mean temperature difference between Nashville, Tennessee and Columbus, Ohio. Is Nashville a hellhole? Is Columbus a paradise?
Most of the world’s population lives in areas where the temperature fluctuates about 20° from day to night. Without the doomsday propaganda, would anyone even notice a few degrees difference on average over a lifetime?
Also, sharp warming occurred between 18,000 and 8,000 years ago. Millions of square miles of glaciers melted, the Great Lakes Appeared, and the entire boreal forest colonized Siberia and Canada — the millions of square miles formerly covered with lifeless ice. It happened before humans were a significant species, so it couldn’t have been our fault.
Was it a catastrophe?
Nothing new about teen age zealots, especially during big social movements such as climate alarmism. (“Waving your banner all over the place” as the song says.) I remember lots from the 60’s. Listening to older people question their zeal is rare at best.
I do question this statement: “One thing is very clear, this intense anger and sense of betrayal seems about as far as you can get from mutual tolerance and respect for others, which underpins Western democracy and civil society.”
Mutual tolerance and respect are relatively rare in politics, however much they might be desired. Despising the other side is far more common.
Given this is a convenience sample, probably self selected by the zealots, it tells us nothing about the general population. (Same for the samples used for global surface temperature estimates by the way.) Thus the results are best termed anecdotal, that is interesting examples of a special case.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the young people lack experience and perspective on the things they don’t really understand, part of the reason we refer to “young love”, among other things.
As a Gen X, I’ve lived through “the coming ice age” (yes, it really was a thing, despite denials), running out of oil before 2000, nuclear war before 2000, nuclear winter after that, swine flu, AIDS and the general population, global warming, “climate change”, “climate disruption”, and on and on. There have been numerous end of the world scenarios, and every one has proven false. The people selling climate doom do not act like it matters to them (Davos and other exotic locations for conferences, instead of Zoom calls, for example). You learn to recognize the hype, with experience.
No one, regardless of age, is entitled to respect, what they are entitled to is civility and courtesy which is almost totally missing in the me society of today. Respect is earned and you don’t earn it by ignoring facts which fail to confirm your beliefs and feelings.
to offer young people the opportunity to talk about climate change in open, non-judgemental conversation, and most importantly to listen, rather than seek to reframe their perspective, is to offer them power to adapt and respond to the crisis they face.
This is so wrong. It is not a conversation if you do not respond to their thoughts. It is lying to them to affirm all the propaganda they are suffering from. Exactly what they need is to hear an alternate view. This advise is worse than that propaganda. It accepts the propaganda as true and reinforces their worry.
Thank you. You read my mind.
Call in the Paiute Tribal Police.
“How do we shore up the foundations of our freedoms, by ensuring our young people learn tolerance and respect for others? ”
Home school ?
😉
We should take a hard look at the school curriculums and the left-leaning media that bombard these kids with alarmist propaganda; then we’ll realize what an unbalanced degree of exposure they’ve been getting on climate issues. We should also closely examine their lifestyles to see what sort of sacrifices they’ve been willing to make to combat the alleged “problem”. We’d quickly find it’s been next to nothing.
My advice to is to agree with the climate concerns of young people, and then ask them how Tasmania can influence China’s energy policy.
“How do we convince today’s young fanatics that they don’t have all the answers?”
A: Put two books on their reading lists.
The first book explains how mass manias arise and take hold of large cohorts, and how difficult it is to emerge from a mania.
The second book explains the roots of fanaticism, and how it provides meaning and purpose to otherwise empty lives.
These books offer insights into misguided crusades of the past, make it easier to recognize them in the here-and-now, and avoid some of the obvious, stupid mistakes.
Whenever anybody starts talking about climate, I ask them if they wish to have a rational discussion on the subject or just trade emotion laden slogans, because I’m not interested in the latter. If the former, I start by asking if they even know what “climate” is. Almost nobody does, which makes it difficult, if not impossible, to have a meaningful discussion about it. And even when they allow me to explain what climate is and why the idea of “global climate” is complete nonsense, the cognitive dissonance makes them bail on the conversation entirely.
So I just nod and smile at them now, like you would a small child or the village idiot.
Maybe it’s just me but there are a lot of subjects that I tend to not put a lot of weight on the opinions of 15 to 19 year olds:
Relationships
Finances and investment
Dietary needs
Tax policy
Recreational activities
Alcohol and drug use
I could go on. The point is that human caused climate change is just one subject among many that I put little stock in the opinions of kids.