Popular in Political Science

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Canadian Politics

Parties and Elections: An End to Canadian Exceptionalism?

St. Francis Xavier University James Bickerton

Asian Politics

The Politics of Knowledge in Development

University of Delhi Madhulika Banerjee

American Politics

Fifty years of declining confidence and increasing polarization in trust

University of California Berkeley Henry Brady

American Politics

The Opening Dilemma

Cornell University Richard Bensel

Political Economy

Wait and See?

University of Liverpool Mariaelisa Epifanio

The Safety Paradox

View more insights in Social Sciences - Political Science - International Relations

View more figures from University of St Andrews

View the page of Karin Fierke

Read the Study

Karin Fierke discusses the impact of unacknowledged grief, shame and guilt, accruing over centuries, on our ability to move forward to a more sustainable future.

Image courtesy of interviewee. July 31, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video primarily explores the interconnectedness of historical colonialism, contemporary climate change, and the collective trauma resulting from these legacies. It asserts that colonialism not only contributed to the current climate crisis but also exacerbates the vulnerabilities of communities that experienced it. The article argues for a rethinking of the security dilemma in international relations by emphasizing the necessity of a holistic approach to global safety amidst climate emergencies, prioritizing the need for cooperation over competition.

This video posits that climate change has often been ignored or denied, as has the acknowledgment of colonialism's role in creating systemic inequalities and environmental degradation. A central argument is whether current approaches to address climate change merely involve adjusting existing systems or require a reckoning with colonial histories and a listening to indigenous knowledge systems.

Moreover, the text discusses how competing global crises, such as wars, distract attention from climate issues, suggesting a paradox where climate action is urgent yet often sidelined. It highlights the need for a broader perspective that recognizes both the urgency of the climate crisis and the deep-rooted legacies of suffering and exclusion, arguing against selective grieving that overlooks many affected by history.

Finally, the text calls for a global reevaluation of narratives surrounding war, environmental responsibility, and collective grief, proposing frameworks to foster a more compassionate, inclusive understanding of shared human experiences and vulnerabilities, thus paving the way for potential sustainable futures.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are some key quotes extracted from the video, which may help capture the essence of the discussion regarding the interconnectedness of colonialism, climate change, and the need for a broader understanding of our shared history:

1. **Legacy of Historical Trauma**: "The larger project was about the contemporary legacy of historical trauma and forced displacement in the present."

2. **Inability to Grasp Colonialism's Impact**: "One important objective... was to rethink the logic of the security dilemma... in regard to the holistic safety that is necessary to navigate the existential threat that climate emergency presents to the entire planet."

3. **Colonialism as a Driver of Climate Change**: "The key point was not only that colonialism has been a driver of the climate crisis, but that it also exacerbates the vulnerability of communities who experience colonialism."

4. **Collective Responsibility**: "A question at the center of these larger debates is whether we see climate change as something that can be addressed by... fixing the present system... or whether developing a more sustainable system requires reckoning with the past of colonialism."

5. **Entangled Histories**: "The main point is how populations have been conditioned by a need to survive in harsh conditions... and how the silencing of grief has given rise to entanglements that contribute to the reproduction of violence and memory across generations."

6. **Seeing and Grieving**: "Our article explores a problem of knowing, seeing and grieving, and the relationship to the inability to address the legacy of colonialism in the past, in the present and the future of climate."

7. **Importance of Acknowledgment**: "The importance of acknowledging and grieving for an entangled whole rather than the selective parts."

8. **Interdependence in Crisis**: "The imminent threat of climate change should make the vulnerability and interdependence of a fragile planet crystal clear."

9. **Repositioning Perspectives**: "A repositioning is needed, which involves a rethinking not only from the positional perspective of separate states but some notion of a global we."

These quotes highlight the analytical depth within the discussion, emphasizing the consequences of historical actions on contemporary situations, the interconnectedness of our global challenges, and the importance of collective acknowledgment and responsibility.

Export as PDF
Here are some similar articles that explore themes of colonialism, climate change, collective trauma, and the interconnectedness of these issues:

1. **"Colonialism and Environmental Degradation: The Lasting Effects of Colonial Policies on Today's Climate Crisis"** - This article delves into how colonial practices have shaped current environmental policies and exacerbated climate change impacts in formerly colonized regions.

2. **"Climate Justice and Indigenous Rights: Rethinking Climate Action"** - This piece explores the importance of recognizing indigenous knowledge systems in climate action initiatives and critiques mainstream approaches that overlook the historical contributions of colonialism to current environmental injustices.

3. **"The Interplay Between Conflict and Climate Change: Historical Convideos and New Approaches"** - This article examines how historical conflicts and colonial legacies contribute to contemporary vulnerabilities in the face of climate change, advocating for integrated solutions that encompass socio-political histories.

4. **"Reckoning with History: Climate Change Through the Lens of Post-Colonial Studies"** - Here, the authors argue for a critical examination of climate change narratives that incorporate post-colonial insights, emphasizing the need to address the historical and systemic inequalities perpetuated by colonialism.

5. **"Shared Histories, Shared Futures: Collective Trauma and Climate Change"** - This article discusses the concept of collective trauma in communities affected by colonialism and how this trauma influences their resilience and responses to climate change, calling for a compassionate understanding of shared experiences.

6. **"Beyond Competition: Rethinking Global Security in Light of Environmental Crises"** - This piece presents arguments for a holistic approach to global security, focusing on cooperation among nations to tackle the dual challenges of climate change and the legacies of colonialism.

7. **"Climate Change, War, and the Urgency of Historical Awareness"** - This article outlines the ways in which current military conflicts obscure the urgent need for climate action, drawing connections between historical injustices and present-day environmental degradation.

These articles collectively contribute to the discourse on the interactions between historical injustices and contemporary environmental challenges, providing a multifaceted perspective on the issues at hand.

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.025 --> 00:02.165
The larger project was about the contemporary legacy

00:02.225 --> 00:05.045
of historical trauma and forced displacement in the present.

00:05.825 --> 00:09.125
So while drawing on insights from the research,

00:09.125 --> 00:12.085
larger research, the article itself was more

00:12.085 --> 00:13.445
of a thought experiment,

00:13.545 --> 00:16.965
for exploring a question about the inability to

00:18.065 --> 00:19.645
really see the gravity

00:19.825 --> 00:22.445
or past of colonialism on one hand in the future

00:22.445 --> 00:25.165
of climate change, on, on the other after, after decades

00:25.305 --> 00:26.805
or centuries in, in each case.

00:27.505 --> 00:30.325
So a thought experiment pushes us out of our comfort zone,

00:30.545 --> 00:33.085
to approach a difficult problem from a different angle.

00:33.745 --> 00:36.685
So one important objective, which I'll return to later, was

00:36.685 --> 00:39.485
to rethink the logic of the security dilemma, which is one

00:39.485 --> 00:43.205
of the central concepts of international relations in regard

00:43.205 --> 00:45.325
to the holistic safety that is necessary

00:45.385 --> 00:47.165
to navigate the existential threat

00:47.435 --> 00:50.405
that climate emergency presents to the entire planet,

00:50.815 --> 00:53.645
which has left populations in former colonies,

00:53.645 --> 00:54.845
particularly vulnerable.

00:55.985 --> 00:57.845
Now, the overall problem is

00:57.845 --> 01:00.805
that climate change has been subject to denial for decades,

01:01.025 --> 01:02.525
and the acknowledgement of the history

01:02.525 --> 01:05.485
of European colonialism throughout the modern era has

01:05.485 --> 01:06.605
been no less half-hearted.

01:07.105 --> 01:10.525
Uh, in 2022, more than 30 af 30 years

01:10.525 --> 01:13.125
after the first report of the, IPCC,

01:14.025 --> 01:16.685
the panel mentioned colonialism as a driver of

01:17.065 --> 01:18.285
as cause of climate change.

01:19.075 --> 01:20.975
And the key point was not only

01:21.005 --> 01:23.735
that colonialism has been a driver of the climate crisis,

01:24.115 --> 01:26.655
but that it also exacerbates the vulnerability

01:26.795 --> 01:28.975
of communities who experience colonialism.

01:29.515 --> 01:31.095
So a question at the center

01:31.115 --> 01:33.895
of these larger debates is whether we see climate change

01:33.955 --> 01:36.455
as something that can be addressed by, for instance,

01:36.455 --> 01:37.775
just fixing the present system

01:38.035 --> 01:41.895
by in developing more sustainable technologies, mitigation

01:41.915 --> 01:43.575
and adaptation on the one hand,

01:43.915 --> 01:46.055
or whether developing a more,

01:46.125 --> 01:48.455
sustainable system requires reckoning

01:48.455 --> 01:49.735
with the past of colonialism.

01:50.235 --> 01:51.615
And from the latter perspective,

01:52.165 --> 01:55.015
climate change is the result of centuries

01:55.115 --> 01:58.535
of research resource extraction, settler cultivation,

01:59.215 --> 02:02.215
enslavement, and indentured servitude, which extends

02:02.215 --> 02:03.655
beyond the end of formal empire

02:03.655 --> 02:06.775
and is reproduced in practices of land appropriation

02:06.775 --> 02:09.455
and resource extraction to meet the needs

02:09.455 --> 02:12.655
of the global north at the expense of the global south.

02:13.355 --> 02:16.295
So from the perspective of colonialism climate change,

02:16.295 --> 02:18.055
there's also a question of whether listening

02:18.055 --> 02:19.615
to the science is enough in itself

02:19.955 --> 02:22.375
or whether a more differentiated approach is needed

02:22.375 --> 02:23.815
that brings indigenous voices

02:24.235 --> 02:27.255
and knowledge systems to the climate discussion systems

02:27.255 --> 02:30.175
that are based on millennia environmental management,

02:30.195 --> 02:32.095
but were erased during the colonial process.

02:32.995 --> 02:34.975
Now, our formulation of that, the, the,

02:34.975 --> 02:37.175
the colonialism climate change problem

02:37.795 --> 02:40.495
had a somewhat different emphasis on the, the ease

02:40.495 --> 02:43.615
with which we're distracted from addressing climate change

02:43.995 --> 02:45.135
by competing demands such

02:45.135 --> 02:46.495
as the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

02:46.515 --> 02:48.735
So on the one hand, fighting the war

02:48.735 --> 02:50.775
and addressing climate change were initially seen

02:50.775 --> 02:54.055
to be compatible as it added urgency to the shift

02:54.075 --> 02:55.975
to more sustainable technologies

02:56.075 --> 02:58.855
and fertilizers to reduce dependency on Russia

02:59.025 --> 03:00.045
For energy and food.

03:00.385 --> 03:03.525
But on the flip side, the military is the greatest polluter

03:03.525 --> 03:04.925
and war destroys the environment.

03:04.925 --> 03:08.445
So it's a sort of catch 22 where the war war contributes

03:08.465 --> 03:10.405
to addressing climate change while more

03:10.425 --> 03:11.485
war threatens the planet.

03:11.625 --> 03:13.845
And it, it's a race to see which is gonna come out first.

03:14.905 --> 03:18.165
Uh, but the other factor about the urgency

03:18.165 --> 03:19.845
and prioritization of war over,

03:20.035 --> 03:22.765
over climate change arises from a concern about sovereignty

03:22.765 --> 03:24.325
in the face of an external threat.

03:24.825 --> 03:27.045
But this does not then include a recognition

03:27.045 --> 03:29.725
that European colonialism did take away the freedoms

03:29.725 --> 03:32.645
of large parts of the world who are now suffering the,

03:32.705 --> 03:34.005
the brunt of climate change.

03:34.705 --> 03:37.485
So this gives rise to a somewhat different question about

03:37.545 --> 03:40.685
who the we, we are, the observers and,

03:40.745 --> 03:44.085
and how our attention is focused given the consequences

03:44.265 --> 03:46.445
of climate change are no less immediate

03:46.625 --> 03:50.045
for populations in foreign former colonial areas than the

03:50.045 --> 03:52.725
war in Ukraine is for those who suffer for it.

03:52.745 --> 03:55.445
And of course, Ukraine is also a former colonial space.

03:56.225 --> 04:00.085
So our article explores a problem of knowing, seeing

04:00.185 --> 04:02.565
and grieving, and the relationship to inability

04:02.625 --> 04:04.485
or inability to address the legacy

04:04.545 --> 04:07.205
of colonialism in the past, in the present

04:07.665 --> 04:09.165
and the future of climate.

04:09.275 --> 04:12.645
Emergency climate change is taking place faster than

04:12.765 --> 04:15.605
originally expected, yet the world is only beginning

04:15.605 --> 04:16.845
to grasp the urgency

04:16.865 --> 04:20.525
or the extent to which assumptions about wealth, gender,

04:20.665 --> 04:22.405
racial inequality or nature,

04:22.825 --> 04:25.805
and the practices that flow from these contribute

04:25.825 --> 04:27.445
to the reproduction of the problem

04:27.505 --> 04:30.805
and the failure to move toward a more sustainable future.

04:31.905 --> 04:35.085
The, the basic idea of the security dilemma is,

04:35.135 --> 04:37.045
which I said was one of the central concepts

04:37.045 --> 04:38.845
of international relations, is

04:38.845 --> 04:41.325
that when individual states perceive a threat from another

04:41.325 --> 04:44.605
state, they tend to arm in, in response in self-defense,

04:44.605 --> 04:46.285
which then may lead to an escalation of

04:46.965 --> 04:49.405
conflict even when nobody may want this.

04:50.225 --> 04:54.205
So rather than this either or choice of whether to arm

04:54.205 --> 04:58.885
or not to arm a, a safety paradox arises from more of,

04:58.985 --> 05:02.765
of a both end relationship of, on the one hand the need

05:02.765 --> 05:04.085
of populations to be safe

05:04.425 --> 05:05.525
and on the other the need

05:05.525 --> 05:08.045
to sustain the global, habitat.

05:08.505 --> 05:12.685
So the problem at present is it states in numerous locations

05:12.685 --> 05:15.325
are preoccupied with fighting or preparing for war,

05:15.705 --> 05:18.365
or does that in various ways exacerbate the environmental

05:18.365 --> 05:19.885
problem at a time when we

05:19.885 --> 05:23.005
as a planet are on a slippery slope to climate catastrophe.

05:23.305 --> 05:25.765
So the problem is one of who, who we, again, who we are,

05:25.905 --> 05:28.485
how we focus attention, what are we able to see

05:28.485 --> 05:30.205
or not see as a result,

05:30.585 --> 05:33.445
and how have patterns of survival by communities

05:33.445 --> 05:36.405
that have emerged over centuries shaped patterns of

05:36.405 --> 05:38.045
what is seen and what we turn away from.

05:38.665 --> 05:42.165
So seeing in this case is less about cognitive visualization

05:42.185 --> 05:43.445
and how we focus attention,

05:43.585 --> 05:46.205
and there's several factors which are relevant

05:46.285 --> 05:48.485
to both individual and more collective experience.

05:48.935 --> 05:51.525
First of all, observation is always a positional.

05:51.765 --> 05:53.365
I mean, there's a lot going on in the world,

05:53.385 --> 05:55.045
and we can't take everything on board.

05:55.385 --> 05:56.685
So we focus on those things

05:56.685 --> 05:57.845
That are important to us,

05:58.425 --> 06:00.885
but this then may be a, a source of illusion in

06:00.885 --> 06:04.445
that it blocks out that which is we see as less important

06:04.445 --> 06:06.325
or that we'd prefer to avoid looking at.

06:06.625 --> 06:09.445
So we're perpetually prone to self-deception

06:09.945 --> 06:12.685
and thus tend to ignore information that might be necessary

06:12.685 --> 06:14.085
to changing a situation.

06:15.025 --> 06:16.765
Second, our language

06:16.765 --> 06:18.805
and socialization is doing a lot of the work.

06:19.265 --> 06:22.285
Um, one of the concepts we explore unknown knowns,

06:22.295 --> 06:24.205
which you may be familiar with,

06:24.395 --> 06:27.645
from Donald Rumsfield in, in the context of the Iraq War.

06:28.025 --> 06:30.285
Uh, we're using the term in a somewhat different way to

06:30.935 --> 06:34.445
refer to those facts that we know, for instance, the history

06:34.445 --> 06:37.525
of enslavement in the US or colonialism on a global scale,

06:38.025 --> 06:39.925
but that remain unresolved

06:39.925 --> 06:41.165
because it's too difficult

06:41.165 --> 06:43.285
to fully acknowledge, acknowledge them.

06:43.345 --> 06:44.805
So there's a big blind spot

06:45.225 --> 06:47.605
of not knowing this past on an emotional level.

06:48.225 --> 06:51.245
Now, further concept of collective agreements not

06:51.245 --> 06:53.845
to know is less about conscious denial

06:54.425 --> 06:57.645
and how the stories that we tell ourselves as individuals

06:57.705 --> 07:02.085
or societies, which which we grow into,

07:02.875 --> 07:05.125
that constrain what we see or don't see.

07:05.745 --> 07:08.205
So for example, there's a growing literature from history

07:08.205 --> 07:10.485
and political theory about how the more negative aspects

07:10.485 --> 07:13.125
of empire have been tended to be written out

07:13.125 --> 07:14.445
of the historical accounts

07:14.785 --> 07:16.765
and how national histories report

07:16.765 --> 07:18.045
of the production of empire.

07:18.465 --> 07:22.605
So it's sort of not seeing, an agreement not to know

07:22.605 --> 07:24.045
that that that side of it,

07:24.945 --> 07:26.525
but from the perspective of this project,

07:26.625 --> 07:28.325
the emotions are really the core problem,

07:28.945 --> 07:32.445
and they're very different emo difficult emotions of shame,

07:32.895 --> 07:35.845
grief and guilt that are associated with aspects of the past

07:35.845 --> 07:38.605
that haven't been, sufficiently acknowledged.

07:39.065 --> 07:42.965
Um, Judith Butler has argued that that grief

07:43.605 --> 07:47.485
requires an acknowledgement of laws, of really looking at it

07:47.825 --> 07:50.805
and, and recognizing that everything has changed.

07:51.685 --> 07:53.425
Um, so there's a difference between

07:54.175 --> 07:56.665
that active turning toward grief

07:56.725 --> 07:58.585
and grieving, acknowledging it

07:58.585 --> 08:00.945
and giving it a place as distinct,

08:01.305 --> 08:03.185
distinct from the turning away.

08:03.205 --> 08:05.625
And d directing of motions outward often

08:05.625 --> 08:07.105
that others in blame.

08:08.085 --> 08:12.065
Now at the moment, grief and trauma seem to be everywhere,

08:13.245 --> 08:16.465
but the problem is the selective nature of grief

08:17.325 --> 08:22.025
and how it actually te tends to,

08:22.285 --> 08:25.625
reinforce distinction distinctions between those

08:25.745 --> 08:28.865
who are worthy of our grief and those who are un grieveable

08:29.165 --> 08:30.385
and thus less than human.

08:31.525 --> 08:35.825
So the point is the, the importance of acknowledging

08:35.925 --> 08:38.425
and grieving for an entangled whole

08:39.405 --> 08:42.705
rather than the selective parts, as well as giving a place

08:42.705 --> 08:44.625
to those who have been excluded

08:44.725 --> 08:47.985
or silenced within the whole for any kind of resolution

08:47.985 --> 08:49.185
that might restore balance.

08:49.685 --> 08:51.985
So to take a perhaps controversial example

08:52.765 --> 08:54.855
from this perspective, the decision not

08:54.855 --> 08:57.725
To invite Russia to participate in the 80th anniversary

08:57.725 --> 08:59.325
of D-Day was a missed opportunity.

09:00.235 --> 09:03.645
Soviets lost 25 million people in World War ii, the most

09:03.645 --> 09:07.045
of any country in the world, China coming second.

09:08.305 --> 09:10.565
Uh, Soviet Union was also an ally at the time.

09:11.065 --> 09:15.125
So that the absence of Russia in that, in that, in that,

09:15.125 --> 09:18.205
commemoration only reinforces the divisions in the current

09:18.305 --> 09:20.005
war rather than giving a place

09:20.385 --> 09:22.485
to world war memory in the past

09:22.625 --> 09:25.365
and acknowledging that the costs, the costs of

09:25.365 --> 09:26.805
that conflict in human life

09:27.065 --> 09:29.645
and its continuing role in international politics

09:29.935 --> 09:32.125
after decades of saying never again.

09:32.475 --> 09:35.165
It's one of the basic premises of the research is

09:35.165 --> 09:36.365
that the world isn't static.

09:36.715 --> 09:39.165
It's in conti continuous, continuous flux,

09:39.625 --> 09:41.845
and thus what is seen and unseen as continuous,

09:42.245 --> 09:43.325
continuously changing.

09:43.705 --> 09:45.565
So we used an example during the pandemic

09:45.565 --> 09:47.405
of the renewed attention to the legacy

09:47.405 --> 09:50.445
of transatlantic slavery following George Floyd's

09:50.485 --> 09:51.525
murder in Minnesota.

09:53.085 --> 09:54.145
Um, it it,

09:54.245 --> 09:57.385
and then the later further shift of emphasis, which

09:58.255 --> 10:00.785
away from that and toward a discourse of good West

10:00.785 --> 10:03.345
and evil Russians after the invasion of, of Ukraine.

10:04.205 --> 10:05.985
So in this respect, how we focus attention

10:05.985 --> 10:07.545
and the stories we tell aren't static,

10:07.545 --> 10:08.985
but they're continuously changing.

10:09.975 --> 10:13.585
Nonetheless, there is a tendency for particular stories to

10:13.605 --> 10:16.625
to, to become stuck and held in place precisely

10:16.895 --> 10:20.665
because of a triangulation that that that may hold sort

10:20.665 --> 10:22.985
of a relationship of seen and unseen ins place.

10:23.325 --> 10:26.625
So in its most simple terms, triangulation,

10:27.355 --> 10:30.105
which actually does have a number of, of different meanings,

10:30.105 --> 10:32.625
but the way I'm using it here is it's about a process

10:32.805 --> 10:33.865
by which a third party,

10:34.325 --> 10:36.385
and this can be an idea, it can be a person,

10:36.445 --> 10:37.465
it can be a collective,

10:37.845 --> 10:39.905
but that third party is pushed outta sight

10:39.925 --> 10:41.505
by the collusion of two other parts.

10:42.045 --> 10:45.065
Um, it's a term that's used in family systems therapy in

10:45.065 --> 10:47.105
regards to family members that that,

10:47.215 --> 10:48.585
that exclude another one.

10:49.365 --> 10:51.625
Or you can see it in an office situation

10:51.625 --> 10:54.545
where a complaint may be silenced by the cooperation

10:54.545 --> 10:56.145
of those who don't want it aired

10:56.805 --> 10:59.545
or triangulation has been discussed in relation to Brexit

10:59.545 --> 11:01.225
and the inability of either the conservatives

11:01.225 --> 11:03.545
or labor to question the efficacy of this outcome.

11:04.085 --> 11:06.945
The example, the specific example we used was the fifth

11:06.945 --> 11:07.945
anniversary of the Battle

11:07.945 --> 11:10.745
of Gettysburg were whites from both north

11:10.885 --> 11:14.785
and south, in the United States, excluded black soldiers

11:15.125 --> 11:17.665
and decided to remember the Civil War

11:17.665 --> 11:19.745
as a war over states rights rather than slavery.

11:20.885 --> 11:24.705
So the, the, this notion of triangulation, it's, you know,

11:24.705 --> 11:28.665
sort of suggests some kind of, collective,

11:28.795 --> 11:29.945
imposition of ideas.

11:30.085 --> 11:32.985
That's, that's, that's not, that's not it, that, you know,

11:33.645 --> 11:37.945
we value democracy in at least where I'm sitting and,

11:38.165 --> 11:42.105
and the the right for multiple positions to engage.

11:42.205 --> 11:43.625
But in practice, what tends

11:43.625 --> 11:47.105
to happen is we fall back into these dominant narratives

11:47.105 --> 11:50.505
that make it difficult to acknowledge the, the suffering

11:50.505 --> 11:51.705
that may be hide behind them.

11:52.205 --> 11:55.365
So a again, a key point is that

11:56.205 --> 11:58.725
entanglements come up, emerge from these silences,

11:58.785 --> 11:59.885
and they don't go away,

11:59.885 --> 12:01.725
and they serve to re reproduce a problem

12:01.725 --> 12:02.965
rather than resolve it.

12:03.425 --> 12:05.845
So triangulation holds a particular boundary

12:05.845 --> 12:07.845
between grievable and un grievable in place,

12:08.385 --> 12:09.965
making it impossible to see

12:10.545 --> 12:13.405
or hear the one collective agreements not

12:13.405 --> 12:15.485
to know may stand in the way of, of anything,

12:15.585 --> 12:16.685
but selective grieving

12:17.305 --> 12:20.125
and such agreements can be found anywhere in the world in a

12:20.125 --> 12:23.165
matrix of intersecting relationships of various kinds.

12:23.745 --> 12:27.445
The safety paradox as a thought experiments to, to recast

12:28.345 --> 12:32.165
the emphasis on fragmentation, that's characteristic

12:32.165 --> 12:33.325
of the security dilemma

12:33.745 --> 12:36.805
and shift the emphasis away from the defensive reaction

12:36.805 --> 12:39.405
of states or the selective grieving for the parts

12:39.865 --> 12:42.685
to focus on the whole on climate emergency.

12:42.825 --> 12:46.565
And as articulated by Cop 27, its relationship to the legacy

12:46.625 --> 12:50.285
of colonialism, both of which we've been turning away from

12:50.305 --> 12:52.325
for decades or centuries, respectively.

12:52.705 --> 12:54.725
Now, whether there has been some movement toward

12:54.725 --> 12:57.325
acknowledging the legacy of colonialism, the politics

12:57.325 --> 12:58.605
of trauma at the moment is,

12:58.745 --> 13:00.605
is fueling fragmentation both within

13:00.605 --> 13:02.205
societies and between states.

13:03.145 --> 13:04.525
And if, again,

13:04.525 --> 13:06.725
if you look at something like the Ukraine War,

13:06.725 --> 13:10.405
where just about every party who is involved in that

13:10.925 --> 13:13.565
conflict has made reference to, to World War II memory,

13:13.625 --> 13:16.285
it raises a question about the extent

13:16.285 --> 13:18.645
to which we have reckoned with this difficult past,

13:19.145 --> 13:21.725
or we can see the prevalence of memories of empire and

13:21.725 --> 13:25.525
or colonialism in the context of Brexit, Russia, China,

13:25.985 --> 13:30.125
or the US and how these play into particular divisions.

13:31.025 --> 13:34.685
Um, and it can raise questions about

13:34.825 --> 13:36.965
how political leaders use these memories,

13:36.985 --> 13:41.165
but also the unresolved, suffering that is behind them

13:41.825 --> 13:45.045
and that it is increasingly recognized can be

13:45.045 --> 13:46.565
transmitted transgenerationally.

13:47.065 --> 13:49.525
So the thought experiment recast these either

13:49.625 --> 13:51.885
or patterns of global fragmentation in terms

13:51.905 --> 13:54.685
of entanglements that are often transgenerational.

13:55.105 --> 13:57.845
The main point is how populations have been conditioned

13:58.185 --> 14:01.005
by a need to survive in harsh conditions in, in the past

14:01.185 --> 14:03.725
and in the present, and how the silencing

14:03.725 --> 14:07.365
of grief has given rise to ent entanglements that contribute

14:07.365 --> 14:08.605
to the reproduction of violence

14:08.705 --> 14:10.285
and memory across generations.

14:10.825 --> 14:13.085
Now, if we take the Israelis and Palestinians,

14:13.105 --> 14:15.445
or the Ukrainians and the Russians as an example,

14:15.875 --> 14:18.805
they each constitute themselves in their separateness

14:19.345 --> 14:22.645
and fragmentation, but their histories are deeply entangled

14:22.875 --> 14:25.165
both with each other and with memories

14:25.165 --> 14:26.765
of Holocaust in World War ii.

14:27.105 --> 14:30.205
And any re resolution in either, either context

14:30.735 --> 14:33.605
would require an ability to see these entanglements

14:33.905 --> 14:37.245
and find ways to recognize the dignity of all of

14:37.425 --> 14:38.685
of life on all sides.

14:39.225 --> 14:42.245
So shifting from a positional perspective of

14:42.755 --> 14:46.645
blaming un grievable others to seeing the entanglement

14:46.645 --> 14:50.885
of conflicting parties opens up space for compassion and

14:51.465 --> 14:54.285
For grieving for the whole, giving it, giving a place

14:54.285 --> 14:56.485
to all who have suffered, whether as victims

14:56.745 --> 14:57.765
or perpetrators.

14:58.105 --> 15:01.285
And this is a relationship that is all also always changing,

15:01.285 --> 15:02.485
particularly when,

15:02.715 --> 15:05.725
when puts things in in a more transgenerational perspective.

15:06.265 --> 15:09.525
So we tend to focus in the moment on the external behavior

15:10.275 --> 15:13.085
without recognizing the suffering that lies behind it,

15:13.255 --> 15:16.885
which may be manipulated or mobilized by elites, but only

15:16.885 --> 15:19.805
because it has a continuing resonance for populations.

15:20.305 --> 15:23.485
And the memories continue to exert an in, a power

15:24.295 --> 15:28.345
over the present, which when viewed selectively di dictates

15:28.345 --> 15:29.865
particular kinds of responses.

15:30.325 --> 15:32.585
So the hegemonic story of any one state

15:32.585 --> 15:34.065
and the collective agreements not

15:34.065 --> 15:37.105
to know contained within anyone stand in the way

15:37.205 --> 15:39.905
of seeing the global hole which is necessary

15:40.005 --> 15:42.105
for prioriti prioritizing the protection

15:42.105 --> 15:43.105
of a shared habitat.

15:43.845 --> 15:45.835
The imminent threat of climate change

15:46.415 --> 15:47.875
should make the vulnerability

15:48.095 --> 15:50.835
and interdependence of a fragile planet crystal clear.

15:51.555 --> 15:53.355
A loss of shared habitat would mean

15:53.355 --> 15:55.995
that we will all become un grieveable

15:56.025 --> 15:58.195
because there will be no one left to grieve

15:58.495 --> 16:00.915
and no future generations to build on this legacy.

16:01.815 --> 16:05.475
The safety paradox regards on the one hand, the inability

16:05.615 --> 16:07.315
to grieve on a global level,

16:07.615 --> 16:09.995
and whether we're talking about the massive loss

16:09.995 --> 16:12.395
of life in the pandemic or of past wars

16:12.395 --> 16:14.395
or threat, not only of global war,

16:14.415 --> 16:16.795
but global environmental catastrophe.

16:17.215 --> 16:20.235
And on the other hand, the importance of grieving for

16:20.235 --> 16:23.275
that whole to pay place sufficient value in our shared

16:23.465 --> 16:25.235
habitat and life to make it happen.

16:25.855 --> 16:28.155
In the present context, we see successor states

16:28.175 --> 16:31.035
of former empires lining up to take ownership

16:31.535 --> 16:34.715
of the global order, many of them fueled by memories

16:34.715 --> 16:36.235
of humiliation and betrayal.

16:36.535 --> 16:39.755
So a repositioning is needed, which involves a rethinking

16:40.295 --> 16:43.555
not only from the per positional perspective

16:43.935 --> 16:48.355
of separate states, but some notion of a global we,

16:48.455 --> 16:50.635
and also to how past, present

16:50.735 --> 16:52.595
and future bleed into each other.

16:53.895 --> 16:56.115
Um, and as regards further research,

16:56.215 --> 17:00.725
and this actually builds on the work that, the,

17:00.745 --> 17:05.045
the other parts of the project, the, the one,

17:05.185 --> 17:08.565
one big question about is, is about how

17:09.225 --> 17:11.965
how we might develop sort of social technologies

17:12.185 --> 17:15.325
or pedagogical techniques that, that,

17:16.555 --> 17:20.325
improve the, the ability to get outside the stories

17:20.325 --> 17:23.205
that we tell ourselves and get outside our own assumptions.

17:23.665 --> 17:27.885
And to, to, to get a more complete view, both of

17:27.905 --> 17:30.365
how practices in inherited from suffering

17:30.365 --> 17:32.365
and survival in the past stand in the way

17:32.865 --> 17:36.045
of moving toward a more sustainable future where

17:36.785 --> 17:37.965
not only human life,

17:38.105 --> 17:41.245
but also non-human life is seen as an essential

17:41.945 --> 17:45.045
to sustaining a complex global ecosystem.

17:45.305 --> 17:48.525
Uh, but to also be able to see in that more complete view

17:49.115 --> 17:51.605
what some of the potentials are that we may not

17:51.625 --> 17:52.365
yet have imagined.

00:00 - The larger project was about the contemporary legacy of historical trauma and forced displacement in the present. So while drawing on insights from the research, larger research, the article itself was more of a thought experiment, for exploring a question about the inability to

00:18 - really see the gravity or past of colonialism on one hand in the future of climate change, on, on the other after, after decades or centuries in, in each case. So a thought experiment pushes us out of our comfort zone, to approach a difficult problem from a different angle. So one important objective, which I'll return to later, was to rethink the logic of the security dilemma, which is one of the central concepts of international relations in regard to the holistic safety that is necessary

00:45 - to navigate the existential threat that climate emergency presents to the entire planet, which has left populations in former colonies, particularly vulnerable. Now, the overall problem is that climate change has been subject to denial for decades, and the acknowledgement of the history of European colonialism throughout the modern era has been no less half-hearted. in 2022, more than 30 af 30 years

01:10 - after the first report of the, IPCC, the panel mentioned colonialism as a driver of as cause of climate change. And the key point was not only that colonialism has been a driver of the climate crisis, but that it also exacerbates the vulnerability of communities who experience colonialism. So a question at the center of these larger debates is whether we see climate change as something that can be addressed by, for instance,

01:36 - just fixing the present system by in developing more sustainable technologies, mitigation and adaptation on the one hand, or whether developing a more, sustainable system requires reckoning with the past of colonialism. And from the latter perspective, climate change is the result of centuries of research resource extraction, settler cultivation, enslavement, and indentured servitude, which extends

02:02 - beyond the end of formal empire and is reproduced in practices of land appropriation and resource extraction to meet the needs of the global north at the expense of the global south. So from the perspective of colonialism climate change, there's also a question of whether listening to the science is enough in itself or whether a more differentiated approach is needed that brings indigenous voices and knowledge systems to the climate discussion systems

02:27 - that are based on millennia environmental management, but were erased during the colonial process. Now, our formulation of that, the, the, the colonialism climate change problem had a somewhat different emphasis on the, the ease with which we're distracted from addressing climate change by competing demands such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. So on the one hand, fighting the war and addressing climate change were initially seen

02:50 - to be compatible as it added urgency to the shift to more sustainable technologies and fertilizers to reduce dependency on Russia For energy and food. But on the flip side, the military is the greatest polluter and war destroys the environment. So it's a sort of catch 22 where the war war contributes to addressing climate change while more war threatens the planet. And it, it's a race to see which is gonna come out first.

03:14 - but the other factor about the urgency and prioritization of war over, over climate change arises from a concern about sovereignty in the face of an external threat. But this does not then include a recognition that European colonialism did take away the freedoms of large parts of the world who are now suffering the, the brunt of climate change. So this gives rise to a somewhat different question about who the we, we are, the observers and,

03:40 - and how our attention is focused given the consequences of climate change are no less immediate for populations in foreign former colonial areas than the war in Ukraine is for those who suffer for it. And of course, Ukraine is also a former colonial space. So our article explores a problem of knowing, seeing and grieving, and the relationship to inability or inability to address the legacy of colonialism in the past, in the present and the future of climate.

04:09 - Emergency climate change is taking place faster than originally expected, yet the world is only beginning to grasp the urgency or the extent to which assumptions about wealth, gender, racial inequality or nature, and the practices that flow from these contribute to the reproduction of the problem and the failure to move toward a more sustainable future. The, the basic idea of the security dilemma is, which I said was one of the central concepts

04:37 - of international relations, is that when individual states perceive a threat from another state, they tend to arm in, in response in self-defense, which then may lead to an escalation of conflict even when nobody may want this. So rather than this either or choice of whether to arm or not to arm a, a safety paradox arises from more of, of a both end relationship of, on the one hand the need of populations to be safe and on the other the need

05:05 - to sustain the global, habitat. So the problem at present is it states in numerous locations are preoccupied with fighting or preparing for war, or does that in various ways exacerbate the environmental problem at a time when we as a planet are on a slippery slope to climate catastrophe. So the problem is one of who, who we, again, who we are, how we focus attention, what are we able to see or not see as a result, and how have patterns of survival by communities

05:33 - that have emerged over centuries shaped patterns of what is seen and what we turn away from. So seeing in this case is less about cognitive visualization and how we focus attention, and there's several factors which are relevant to both individual and more collective experience. First of all, observation is always a positional. I mean, there's a lot going on in the world, and we can't take everything on board. So we focus on those things

05:56 - That are important to us, but this then may be a, a source of illusion in that it blocks out that which is we see as less important or that we'd prefer to avoid looking at. So we're perpetually prone to self-deception and thus tend to ignore information that might be necessary to changing a situation. Second, our language and socialization is doing a lot of the work. one of the concepts we explore unknown knowns,

06:22 - which you may be familiar with, from Donald Rumsfield in, in the context of the Iraq War. we're using the term in a somewhat different way to refer to those facts that we know, for instance, the history of enslavement in the US or colonialism on a global scale, but that remain unresolved because it's too difficult to fully acknowledge, acknowledge them. So there's a big blind spot of not knowing this past on an emotional level.

06:48 - Now, further concept of collective agreements not to know is less about conscious denial and how the stories that we tell ourselves as individuals or societies, which which we grow into, that constrain what we see or don't see. So for example, there's a growing literature from history and political theory about how the more negative aspects of empire have been tended to be written out of the historical accounts and how national histories report

07:16 - of the production of empire. So it's sort of not seeing, an agreement not to know that that that side of it, but from the perspective of this project, the emotions are really the core problem, and they're very different emo difficult emotions of shame, grief and guilt that are associated with aspects of the past that haven't been, sufficiently acknowledged. Judith Butler has argued that that grief requires an acknowledgement of laws, of really looking at it

07:47 - and, and recognizing that everything has changed. so there's a difference between that active turning toward grief and grieving, acknowledging it and giving it a place as distinct, distinct from the turning away. And d directing of motions outward often that others in blame. Now at the moment, grief and trauma seem to be everywhere, but the problem is the selective nature of grief

08:17 - and how it actually te tends to, reinforce distinction distinctions between those who are worthy of our grief and those who are un grieveable and thus less than human. So the point is the, the importance of acknowledging and grieving for an entangled whole rather than the selective parts, as well as giving a place to those who have been excluded or silenced within the whole for any kind of resolution that might restore balance.

08:49 - So to take a perhaps controversial example from this perspective, the decision not To invite Russia to participate in the 80th anniversary of D-Day was a missed opportunity. Soviets lost 25 million people in World War ii, the most of any country in the world, China coming second. Soviet Union was also an ally at the time. So that the absence of Russia in that, in that, in that, commemoration only reinforces the divisions in the current war rather than giving a place

09:20 - to world war memory in the past and acknowledging that the costs, the costs of that conflict in human life and its continuing role in international politics after decades of saying never again. It's one of the basic premises of the research is that the world isn't static. It's in conti continuous, continuous flux, and thus what is seen and unseen as continuous, continuously changing.

09:43 - So we used an example during the pandemic of the renewed attention to the legacy of transatlantic slavery following George Floyd's murder in Minnesota. it it, and then the later further shift of emphasis, which away from that and toward a discourse of good West and evil Russians after the invasion of, of Ukraine. So in this respect, how we focus attention and the stories we tell aren't static,

10:07 - but they're continuously changing. Nonetheless, there is a tendency for particular stories to to, to become stuck and held in place precisely because of a triangulation that that that may hold sort of a relationship of seen and unseen ins place. So in its most simple terms, triangulation, which actually does have a number of, of different meanings, but the way I'm using it here is it's about a process by which a third party, and this can be an idea, it can be a person,

10:36 - it can be a collective, but that third party is pushed outta sight by the collusion of two other parts. it's a term that's used in family systems therapy in regards to family members that that, that exclude another one. Or you can see it in an office situation where a complaint may be silenced by the cooperation of those who don't want it aired or triangulation has been discussed in relation to Brexit

10:59 - and the inability of either the conservatives or labor to question the efficacy of this outcome. The example, the specific example we used was the fifth anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg were whites from both north and south, in the United States, excluded black soldiers and decided to remember the Civil War as a war over states rights rather than slavery. So the, the, this notion of triangulation, it's, you know, sort of suggests some kind of, collective,

11:28 - imposition of ideas. That's, that's, that's not, that's not it, that, you know, we value democracy in at least where I'm sitting and, and the the right for multiple positions to engage. But in practice, what tends to happen is we fall back into these dominant narratives that make it difficult to acknowledge the, the suffering that may be hide behind them. So a again, a key point is that entanglements come up, emerge from these silences,

11:58 - and they don't go away, and they serve to re reproduce a problem rather than resolve it. So triangulation holds a particular boundary between grievable and un grievable in place, making it impossible to see or hear the one collective agreements not to know may stand in the way of, of anything, but selective grieving and such agreements can be found anywhere in the world in a

12:20 - matrix of intersecting relationships of various kinds. The safety paradox as a thought experiments to, to recast the emphasis on fragmentation, that's characteristic of the security dilemma and shift the emphasis away from the defensive reaction of states or the selective grieving for the parts to focus on the whole on climate emergency. And as articulated by Cop 27, its relationship to the legacy of colonialism, both of which we've been turning away from for decades or centuries, respectively.

12:52 - Now, whether there has been some movement toward acknowledging the legacy of colonialism, the politics of trauma at the moment is, is fueling fragmentation both within societies and between states. And if, again, if you look at something like the Ukraine War, where just about every party who is involved in that conflict has made reference to, to World War II memory, it raises a question about the extent

13:16 - to which we have reckoned with this difficult past, or we can see the prevalence of memories of empire and or colonialism in the context of Brexit, Russia, China, or the US and how these play into particular divisions. and it can raise questions about how political leaders use these memories, but also the unresolved, suffering that is behind them and that it is increasingly recognized can be transmitted transgenerationally. So the thought experiment recast these either

13:49 - or patterns of global fragmentation in terms of entanglements that are often transgenerational. The main point is how populations have been conditioned by a need to survive in harsh conditions in, in the past and in the present, and how the silencing of grief has given rise to ent entanglements that contribute to the reproduction of violence and memory across generations. Now, if we take the Israelis and Palestinians, or the Ukrainians and the Russians as an example,

14:15 - they each constitute themselves in their separateness and fragmentation, but their histories are deeply entangled both with each other and with memories of Holocaust in World War ii. And any re resolution in either, either context would require an ability to see these entanglements and find ways to recognize the dignity of all of of life on all sides. So shifting from a positional perspective of blaming un grievable others to seeing the entanglement

14:46 - of conflicting parties opens up space for compassion and For grieving for the whole, giving it, giving a place to all who have suffered, whether as victims or perpetrators. And this is a relationship that is all also always changing, particularly when, when puts things in in a more transgenerational perspective. So we tend to focus in the moment on the external behavior without recognizing the suffering that lies behind it, which may be manipulated or mobilized by elites, but only

15:16 - because it has a continuing resonance for populations. And the memories continue to exert an in, a power over the present, which when viewed selectively di dictates particular kinds of responses. So the hegemonic story of any one state and the collective agreements not to know contained within anyone stand in the way of seeing the global hole which is necessary for prioriti prioritizing the protection of a shared habitat.

15:43 - The imminent threat of climate change should make the vulnerability and interdependence of a fragile planet crystal clear. A loss of shared habitat would mean that we will all become un grieveable because there will be no one left to grieve and no future generations to build on this legacy. The safety paradox regards on the one hand, the inability to grieve on a global level, and whether we're talking about the massive loss

16:09 - of life in the pandemic or of past wars or threat, not only of global war, but global environmental catastrophe. And on the other hand, the importance of grieving for that whole to pay place sufficient value in our shared habitat and life to make it happen. In the present context, we see successor states of former empires lining up to take ownership of the global order, many of them fueled by memories of humiliation and betrayal.

16:36 - So a repositioning is needed, which involves a rethinking not only from the per positional perspective of separate states, but some notion of a global we, and also to how past, present and future bleed into each other. and as regards further research, and this actually builds on the work that, the, the other parts of the project, the, the one, one big question about is, is about how how we might develop sort of social technologies

17:12 - or pedagogical techniques that, that, improve the, the ability to get outside the stories that we tell ourselves and get outside our own assumptions. And to, to, to get a more complete view, both of how practices in inherited from suffering and survival in the past stand in the way of moving toward a more sustainable future where not only human life, but also non-human life is seen as an essential to sustaining a complex global ecosystem.

17:45 - but to also be able to see in that more complete view what some of the potentials are that we may not yet have imagined.

Faculti AI can make mistakes