Political realists are really quite practical. Their sense of "realpolitik," a system of politics based on practical rather than moral or ideological considerations, and independence help them affect real change because they think about actions that can successfully be carried out. When thinking about how political realists feel about the climate strikes, it's likely they understand the message behind it, but don't really believe it to be that impactful.
In regards to the independence, self-help, and national interest characteristics of a "realist" approach to politics, the climate strikes are significant in terms of showing public interest but not really affecting change. Many of the strikers support the Paris Climate Agreement, which goes against the independence aspect of being a realist. A political realist would shun international agreements and place a larger focus on improving things through domestic policy. They would support policies that focus on green energies target to specific areas, like solar panels in the desert and hydropower along rivers. In a political realists' point of view, support for the Paris Climate Agreement would not be beneficial and wouldn't achieve anything.
When thinking about the system of "realpolitik," the strikers' support of the Green New Deal would not be supported by political realists. The Green New Deal is an idyllic policy plan that promotes broad policy plans but no specific actions. In the eyes of political realists, this is not a practical plan as it doesn't actually accomplish anything.
The above reasons are why political realists would look down upon the climate strikers and have them call for more specific policy actions.
Nice Kiran! I agree with your views regarding realpolitik, and your perception of how a realist would view the strike. Putting myself in a realists point of view has invoked many thoughts, and made me questions many of the realist stances in regards to climate change. For example, imagine if climate change were just a natural occurrence that were inevitable, and it is not a phenomenon that humans could have an actual impact on. To make it even more extreme, as a matter of fact, maybe climate change and the consequence of a warmer earth is better for us? Have you ever thought of that perspective? Check out this video (If you have time): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKd30j1HX48
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think?
One of the fascinating things about climate change is that it isn't uniformly bad for all forms of life on the planet, and it isn't equally impactful even for all humans on the planet. What a realist approach would do in the face of that kind of ambiguity about what "the national interest" is, is somewhat unclear...
ReplyDelete