I am writing this the evening of June 7. Today, the skies were choked with smoke from burning forests in Quebec and Ontario, forests not unlike our own. At times today, it was impossible to see a tree 300 yards away, let alone the hills above town.

The great fires of Australia and California have finally made their way east. The contrarian position of denying climate change continues to render itself more and more as a funny, if awful and far too powerful joke. Yet, at this point, those that cling to the fading phantasy exist as something of a dwindling yet dominant, vocal minority. The real threat to our hope for the future lies, rather, in three other sorts of people.

The first is those who utterly lack hope. This sorry frame of mind is understandable; the world appears to us now to be a broken place — one that grows increasingly more broken with each passing article or soundbite bearing bad news. It is a frame of mind that we have all experienced in recent years. It is not easy to remain hopeful. However, in those times of absolute pessimism, when action is nonetheless required, those who embrace an undying belief in a better future end up being the ones to create it.

Each of the three mindsets under discussion has the characteristic of contagiousness, but absolute pessimism (being “black-pilled” as we call it today), is particularly infectious. In a context where all must act in a spirit of mutual action, a disavowal of such action, even from just one voice, is enough to make all abandon hope. Really, the more of us that choose to be committed to political actions which will slow or end climate change, and the fewer of us that remain pessimistic, the more of us than can be committed to such actions, or more of us are incentivized to be committed to action.

The second frame of mind lies in those who, once having given up hope and grow resentful of society for not acting. This is the start of an idealistic pipeline that leads from simple resentment to gratification at the decay of society; from here it leads one to a position of actively trying to accelerate the decay of society. Crazy as it might sound, this is an actual way of thinking in the modern world. This kind of thinking is called accelerationism. Rather than making a concerted effort to stop or slow climate change, an accelerationist would think that civilization could be made how they see fit only after climate change (or any other cause) leads to the inevitable collapse of society.

Many radical libertarians and out-and-out fascists hold to this notion. It is the antithesis of a modern consciousness and set of values, of democracy and of a politics of love and freedom.

The last kind of dangerous mindset involves thinking that it is not one’s responsibility to be committed to attempt action, that others will do that task for them, or that the problem lies out of their hands. Now, with this particular effect of climate change — we are facing the direct consequences of events happening in another country — it is easy to put one’s head down into one’s work, accept that life is hard and that one can do little, and leave this issue to the Canadians. But this is an issue happening at a global level. We live in the world, a shared world, living lives not unlike those of everyone else, whether they be in Rwanda or the Dominican Republic or China — let alone Canada. As such, we all have a set of shared interests. One of those interests is of course shear survival. Much of the world, at this point, lives in a state of civilization quite a bit like our own. And those parts of the world which do not live this way likely will soon. It is in the interest of all of us in the world to want to perpetuate civilization. This ongoing crisis requires us all to act in order to survive, in order for civilization to survive.

On a related note: there is a concept in economics called the Tragedy of the Commons, where a village of peasants is given a piece of land to hold in common and to be utilized by all as they please; in this story, the peasants go about using this common land for grazing cattle, and because all the peasants are using this land, each one is incentivized to maximize their use of this land, grazing ever more cattle on it. Within months the land has been over-grazed and the peasants starve. It is an interesting story. I even remember being taught it in high school economics. The thing is, it has no basis in reality. Supposedly, it is about the use of common lands in England in the late Medieval period, but there are no records from that time, or any other time in British history, where such a tragedy of the commons ever occurred. Instead, prior to the Industrial Revolution and the privatization of all commodities which ensued, common land in rural settings virtually everywhere around the world, from Mexico to Scotland to Japan, had been utilized for thousands of years quite successfully under codes of conduct which emphasized mutuality. I say all this, not to propose communism or anything, but to suggest that the world is a kind commons. And we can either abuse it to our own advantage or we can act in a spirit of mutuality to the advantage of all.

As the manifold problems grow, we prove ourselves to care little about the future younger people like me will have to endure. I’ve had conversations with friends of mine where we have genuinely considered whether it is worth having kids, due to a near certain future of instability. I want to do something because we keep doing nothing.

Not that there is a lack of things to do: the government still has not abandoned subsidies for production of fossil fuels, both at the state and national level; highway construction is still the largest form of infrastructure spending. Where should this money go? If we were serious about fighting climate change, that money would be spent on the construction of more efficient forms of mass transit and infrastructure like intercity rail, high speed rail, subways and cycling lanes. Not to get side tracked, but much is to be done. And, again, whatever we do, it will have global significance — good or bad — for individuals like ourselves from around the world.

The fires grow; the ANF could easily be next. Soon we might wake up in the morning to the evacuation orders and firestorms. In such a state, we have a responsibility to do something. It becomes necessary.

Gareth Smith is a Warren resident.