Unpacking the Genetic Metanarrative

Chapter 5 reviews the genetic metanarrative that underlies not just the narrative of climate skepticism but those found in other issue areas, as well, analogous to the work of literary theorist Vladimir Propp who sought a foundational set of universal plots behind children’s tales. The chapter presents analysis of texts from diverse issue areas (climate skepticism, immigration, the gun lobby) that reveals strong commonalities in plot and structure and allows reconstruction of an elemental or genetic metanarrative that underlies each of these issue areas to uncover foundational themes that speak to social fracturing and societal divisions. As the chapter shows, people’s beliefs about different issues translate to narratives that all have a common underlying plot and are essentially the same story told and retold in varying ways. The implication is that anti-climate science narratives are founded on elemental plots that are not even about science or climate to begin with. Instead, their roots lie deeper in the social fracturing of present-day society.

Skeptics without Borders

Chapter 4 employs a comparative lens to show how the climate skeptical norm transformed to fit the social-economic conditions, cultures, and institutional settings of each context as it diffused from place to place. It highlights how in the United Kingdom people may dispute climate change science while remaining open to the possibility that mean global temperatures are rising, while elsewhere climate skepticism seems to merge with a broader sentiment of mistrust. Using narrative analysis, this chapter underscores the point that climate skeptical narratives are not homogeneous. The focus is not a historical examination of the narrative but a cross-sectional, or synchronic, one—commonalities and contrasts among climate skeptical narratives as popularly espoused in different countries occurring simultaneously. The chapter examines how differences in climate skeptical narratives from country to country can provide insights into how and why climate skepticism has resonated among the public in each place.

When Skepticism Became Public

Chapter 3 traces the emergence and evolution of the climate skeptical narrative in the United States, showing how it has become more ideological over time, in tandem with sociopolitical events and movements. It examines the development and shifts in the narrative from the early twenty-first century to the present through narrative and critical discourse analyses of summary plots of articles and accompanying comments in conservative media outlets over five successive periods of time, providing textual evidence of how the narrative grew increasingly ideological in each period. The following textual analyses illustrate how skeptics have constructed an alternative ideological narrative through invariance, repetition, alternative data, binary frames (us vs. them), attributing sinister motives to and demonizing the other side, and reinforcing positions by sharing the narrative with like-minded people. In so doing, they created their own narrative-network by denaturalizing the dominance of anthropogenic climate change, framing it as unsettled science, and linking it to politics and fundamental American values of freedom.

Ideology as Narrative

Chapter 2 considers what happens at the sharp turn in the road when a narrative does not just lend meaning and organization to the group but isolates it from healthy public discourse; an adversarial turn that occurs when the group’s narrative becomes a closed and rigid ideology. The chapter outlines the telltale signs of the ideological transition and describes some key features that can be uncovered through narrative analysis. It goes on to discuss how the closedness of a narrative is closely related to the insularity of the group. Finally, text from climate skeptical blogs and op-eds are examined and the narrative approach to analyzing ideology is illustrated.

The Social Construction of Climate Science

Chapter 6 shows how in constructing, with some success, a challenge to the narrative of climate change science, the skeptical narrative has increasingly taken on features of ideology. A similar phenomenon may also be happening among the ranks of climate change advocates, with the response to skeptics taking on elements of ideological talk. Reactions to a prominent climate skeptic are examined in the chapter, along with characteristics of climate scientists’ responses to the skeptics. The chapter asks if this a pattern of negative feedback, with ideological discourse on one side eliciting a similarly ideological counter-reaction from the other, and suggests that if this is so, it does not bode well for the idea that constructive engagement of contending publics is still possible. Any way out of this impasse will require an openness on the part of the climate scientific majority to the interests and concerns of a skeptical public. Most fundamentally, the chapter shows, there is something about much climate change discourse that is modernist, exhibiting cultural biases that can alienate the other (e.g., the global South).

Ideological Narratives and beyond in a Post-Truth World

Chapter 7 concludes with a review of the self-constructed climate skeptic community’s efforts to challenge the dominance of anthropogenic climate science by systematically creating an ideological narrative framed as us vs. them through particular use of words/phrases and rhetorical and messaging strategies. US climate skepticism is also part of the post–WW II anti-reflexivity movement that views reflexivity around climate science as increasingly intruding on public policy and personal freedoms, which it vehemently rejects. To meet this challenge, this chapter proposes building on existing research combatting misinformation about science; changing the messaging around climate science; changing communication strategies in mainstream and social media; and teaching climate change in schools. It argues that continued debate is necessary, giving scientists their due on matters of evidence while not dismissing people’s doubts and closing off discussion. In an increasingly divided world, only dialogue can begin to save us from ideological paralysis.

Introduction

Chapter 1 reviews the ways in which communities are formed, by all manner of things, from the physical basis of their existence, their legal identity, and the people that form them. It suggests that if there is anything in common across all communities, it is that they are each represented and bound together by a constitutive narrative. Narratives can make believers, or skeptics, of us all and, moreover, forge us into a community. The book takes up one form of community, that of climate skeptics, that has resonated with enough people that it has begun challenging the scientific community in what is ostensibly a matter of science. The chapter lays out the argument to be developed in the book: that much of this is due to the strength of the climate skeptical narrative, and that this narrative draws from elements of plot that are more fundamental even than the issue of climate. The use of narrative analysis can trace the evolution of the ideological narrative and its effect on insulating its community from health public debate.