“Disagreement is not the conflict between one who says white and another who says black. It is the conflict between one who says white and another who also says white but does not understand the same thing by it.” – Jacques Rancière
If there was a time in which our societal disagreements seemed more definitional than foundational in nature, this surely isn’t it. I fear the opposite is true. In America and elsewhere, our disagreements seem starker than at any time in recent history.
Climate change and the debate surrounding it reflects this sea change in shared understanding. The dispute between the United States and the rest of world does not center on the technicalities of anthropomorphic climate change, but its existence. The global debate we’re having is not about which climate model is the most accurate or which strategy best mitigates coastal flooding. It’s about whether climate change is a real phenomenon or a “hoax created by the Chinese.” When trust in scientists splits along partisan lines, it’s not a matter of a fight over interpretations of the same truth. It’s a fight over truth itself.
Trust in institutions remains low. Congress is as polarized as any time in the last 100 years. There is significant disagreement about matters of fact (“who won the popular vote?”). Respect for that which previously unified us has eroded and potent tribalism seems to carry the day, or at least the headlines.
It’s tough to see a path out from this.
I worry that these trends will continue. I worry that we will retreat further into bubbles of likeminded people and do our best to block out the rest. I worry that truth will become more fungible than it is today and we will become unmoored from the values we share.
Yet, I think those values have staying power. It may take us a while to remember them and even longer to recognize them in the eyes of those we disagree with, but we will. I’m part of a generation that is intellectually curious and profoundly connected. We err on the side of tolerance and desire change. We do not and will not frequently agree, but I get the sense that we’re better at seeing the shades.
I had the experience of a lifetime on this dialogue with over thirty of my peers. We heard from countless people working in the trenches of climate mitigation and anti-poverty efforts. These were scientists and policymakers and students who did not let broader disagreements stop them from doing the necessary work of improving the world around them. They refused to be cowed by skeptics. They engaged with the audiences they had and explained their work without bluster. They made it easy to see the world as it is: perilously close to climate and humanitarian disaster but worth fighting for. On that last point, I’m hopeful all can agree.
