Rising authoritarianism is a sign of worsening climate change. This fossil-fueled secret is a big deal

Many countries are located around the world. becoming less democratic. This backsliding on democracy and “Creeping authoritarianism,” as the U.S. State Department puts it, is often supported by the same industries that are escalating climate change.

In my new book, “Global Burning: Rising Antidemocracy, Climate Crisis,” I lay out connections between these industries and the politicians who are both stalling action on climate change and diminishing democracy.

It’s a dangerous shift, both for representative government and for the future climate.

Environmental politics is being taken over by corporate interests

In democratic systems, elected leaders should be expected to protect the public’s interestsThese include exploitation by corporations. They do this primarily by implementing policies that secure public goods such as clean air, unpolluted water, and human welfare such as minimum wages and working conditions. In recent decades, however, this core democratic principle which prioritizes citizens over corporate profit has been reaffirmed. been aggressively undermined.

Today, it’s easy to find political leaders – on both the political right and left – Working for corporationsIn the energy, finance, agribusiness and technology sectors. These multinational companies Contribute to their political careersThey will also be running election campaigns to keep them in the office.

In the U.S., this relationship was cemented by the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United. The decision allowed corporations to spend virtually unlimited amounts and wealthy donors could support candidates who best served their interests. Data shows that Candidates who have the most outside funding win.. This has resulted in an increase in corporate Influence on politicians and party policies.

When it comes to the political parties, it’s easy to find examples of campaign finance fueling political agendas.

In 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testifiedBefore a U.S. Senate Committee about the greenhouse effect, both Republican and Democratic parties took climate changes seriously. But, their attitudes quickly diverged. Since the 1990sThe energy sector has heavily funded conservative candidates to push its interests and help reduce regulations for the fossil fuel industry. This has allowed the growth of fossil fuel production and increased CO2 emissions. dangerous levels.

The industry’s power in shaping policy plays out in examples like the coalition of 19 Republican state attorneys general and coal companies Blockade litigationThe Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse gas emissions from power plant.

While the energy sector has attempted to influence climate change policies, it has also been successful in its own right. undermine the public’s understandingClimate science. ExxonMobil was one of the participants in a number of climate science events. widespread climate-science denial campaignFor years, the US has spent more than US$30million on lobbyists, think tank and researcher to promote climate-science skepticalism. These efforts continue today. A 2019 report revealed that the five largest oil companies had spent approximately $2.5 trillion. Over $1 billion spent on misleadingly climate-related lobbying campaigns and branding campaignsThe previous three years.

The energy industry has been in effect The democratic political process was capturedThey prevented the enactment effective climate policies.

Corporate interests have also fueled an increase in antidemocratic leaders with well-funded resources who are willing and able to stall existing climate policies and regulations. These political leaders’ tacticsThese have led to public health crises and, in some instances, human rights violations.

Brazil, Australia, and the US

Many antidemocratic governments are linked to oil, gas, and other extractive industry that are driving climate change. This includes Russia, Saudi Arabian, Iran, Iraq, China, and Iran.

In “Global Burning,” I explore how three leaders of traditionally democratic countries – Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Scott Morrison of Australia and Donald Trump in the U.S. – came to power on anti-environment and nationalist platforms appealing to an extreme-right populist base and extractive corporations that are driving climate change. Although each country’s political landscape is unique, there are important commonalities between the three leaders.

Bolsonaro, MorrisonAnd TrumpAll rely on extractive corporations for funding electoral campaigns.

For instance, Bolsonaro’s power depends on support from a powerful right-wing association of landowners and farmers called the União Democrática Ruralista, or UDR. This association represents foreign investors, specifically in the multibillion dollar mining and agribusiness industries. Bolsonaro said that he would continue to do so if elected in 2019. He would openly demolish environmental protections.In the name of economic progress industrial-scale soybean productionAnd cattle grazingAmazon rainforest. Both are contributing to climate change and deforestation of a fragile region that is crucial for carbon removal from the atmosphere.

Bolsonaro, MorrisonAnd TrumpThey are all openly skeptical about climate science. They have all ignored, weakened or eliminated environmental protection regulations. This led to rapid deforestation in Brazil and large areas of Amazon rainforest burning.

In Australia, Morrison’s government ignored Opposition from the public and scientists is widespreadAnd opened the controversial Adani Carmichael mineOne of the most important coal mines in the country. The mine will have an impact on public health and the climate, and it threatens the Great Barrier Reef. temperatures risePorts are being built along the coast.

Trump Withdrew the U.S.From the Paris climate agreement – a move Opposed by a majority Americans – More than 100 laws to protect the environment were repealedOpen National parksTo fossil fuel drilling and mining.

Notably, the three leaders have sometimes worked together against international efforts to end climate change. At the United Nations climate talks in Spain in 2019, Costa Rica’s minister for environment and energy at the time, Carlos Manuel Rodriguez, blamed Brazil, Australia and the U.S. for BlockadeClimate injustice related to global heating must be addressed

These responses to climate changes are not unique to Brazil, Australia, or the U.S. Similar convergences have occurred around the globe of antidemocratic leaders who receive funding from extractive corporations and who then implement similar policies. Anti-environment laws and policiesThey defend corporate profits. The current moment is marked by the fact that these leaders are using state power to grab corporate land to build dams and mines, as well as to defend corporate profits.

For example, TrumpSupported the Deployment of the National GuardTo disperse Native Americans, environmental activists and others protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. He had previously been involved in this project. Personally invested in. His administration also Proposed harsher penalties for protestors of the pipelineThis was the same as the legislation that was promoted by American Legislative Exchange CouncilThe, whose members include legislators and lobbyists for oil industry. Several Republican-led states enacted Similar anti-protest laws.

Brazil has been ruled by Bolsonaro Modified lawsIn ways that encourage land grabbers Encourage small farmers to support Indigenous peopleThey are free to leave their land in the rainforest.

Continue reading:
The great Amazon land grab – how Brazil’s government is clearing the way for deforestation

What can people do to stop it?

There are many things people can do for democracy and the climate.

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by replacing fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy. These are the things you should do. The biggest obstaclesA recent example of this is. U.N. climate reportNotable are the national leaders who refuse to regulate fossil fuel corporations, reduce greenhouse gases emissions, or plan for renewable energy production.

My view is that voters must resist the global trend toward authoritarianism as a way to move forward. As Slovenia did in April 2022, and moving forward to replace fossil fuels with sustainable energy. People can exercise their democratic rights by voting out anti-environment government leaders whose power is based on prioritizing extractive capital over the best interests for their citizens.