Climate mythology in news media: Exposing the fallacy of people versus the planet

Abstract

In recent years, the world has been shocked by the Christchurch shooting, the El Paso shooting, and various other attacks against humanity. These murderous rampages have been condoned by the idea that the perpetrators were working to combat climate change. These perpetrators are self-proclaimed ecofascists. Michael E. Zimmerman offers a brief and simplified definition of ecofascism (Zimmerman, 2008). Ecofascism, according to Zimmerman, is “a totalitarian government that requires individuals to sacrifice their interests to the well-being of the 'land', understood as the splendid web of life, or the organic whole of nature, including peoples and their states" (Zimmerman, 2008). Ecofascism, however, does not target all people equally. Notably, ecofascists target those marginalized by racialization, disability, gender, and immigration status. While ecofascism was widespread in and prior to Nazi Germany, it has seen a resurgence in recent years. This has been attributed to rising concern regarding the climate crisis and the invention of the internet which has made ecofascist communities (by way of internet forums) readily available to almost anyone at any time. Most ecofascists (or even people who do not explicitly call themselves by this name but certainly tout its principles) do not perpetrate mass shootings or bombs. Rather, their violence comes by way of advocating against progressive values, policies, and discourse. Most ecofascists enact their violence through dangerous rhetoric, promoting ideas such as eugenics, race science, and anti-immigration discourse. While this may not be direct violence in the way a mass shooting is, it is nonetheless deadly. Imperialism, extraction, and closed borders do lead to real, tangible harm, human death, and suffering. While this rhetoric is not explicitly violent in the way that a mass shooting is, it is violent in the hatred it breeds. Ecofascists strive for a future where a ‘clean’ climate is dependent on human suffering- they argue only some are worthy of living on such a planet. Ecofascists believe that there is a scarcity of resources, and that it must thus be determined who “deserves” these resources. Unsurprisingly, this benefits global elites and harms those who are marginalized by systems like capitalism, racism, and misogyny. This is clearly not ethical or the only way forward. Ecofascism exists in stark contrast to MacDougall Fleming 6 environmental justice, which seeks equitable benefits of a clean and healthy environment for all communities. Ecofascist discourse can disseminate from grim corners of the internet and enter popular discourse. That being said, there is little to no research regarding how ecofascist rhetoric disseminates into popular discourse surrounding the climate crisis. One way that discourse is introduced and circulated throughout society is through the news media. The news media is a trusted source for information and is strategically framed as an objective, unbiased informant. A feminist analysis of this notion would argue that news is not unbiased, and that individual perceptions of the world are translated through discourse. This is especially true and potentially dangerous when the source is funded by large, multi-billion dollar familial empires, industries, or nations with their own set of values and motives. It is therefore important to be critical of information disseminated in the news media, and question the intent behind stories that are presented as factual.