‘Don’t Look Up’, the movie starring Jennifer Lawrence and Leonardo Di Caprio is up for at least 4 Oscars at the 94th award ceremony. Hollywood has a history of churning out America-saves-the-world kitsch. People have also thronged theatres to watch movies about Americans surviving a global catastrophe.
‘Don’t Look Up’ doesn’t fall in either of these categories. There is a similarity to the 1965 classic ‘Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb’. There is a sense of fatalism that pervades these movies, one realises that nothing can stop human ingenuity from its proclivity to self-harm.
Though, the stories are fictional they are based on truths, not only about homo sapiens penchant to play with fire but also the global situation that the movie uses as its premise. In the case of Dr Strangelove, the movie was made during the Cold War when the erstwhile USSR and America faced off, each creating deadlier nuclear weapons to decimate the other. ‘Don’t Look Up’ uses the analogy of a meteor heading to earth and the responses to this threat to portray the reactions to the Climate Change crisis the world is facing.
In Psychology, the response to a threat is discussed in terms of flight-or-fight. Humans have evolved to either flee from a threat or fight it. However, there is third option that many choose – denial. Many opt to be blind to the presence of a threat. This option is selected for a variety of reasons, some of which are – the belief that the threat will be resolved by someone else, the threat will by-pass them, the threat is not actually a threat, that responding to the threat will mean changing their lifestyle, the fatalistic belief that nothing can be done to neutralise the threat, the assumption that responding to the threat will only increase its potency and finally that the threat may yet be a good thing.
In the past few decades there is a fourth response – placate and pander to the threat in the belief that the threat will change its ways. This is usually an argument put forward by businesses wishing to tap into the resources held in countries ruled by repressive regimes. This has been done in Myanmar and Russia for example. A toxic relationship is a result of denial.
In the long run, denial is like choosing to adopt a tiger cub as a pet. The larger it grows the more voracious is its appetite and the more dangerous it becomes. Spending more on feeding the animal then becomes a survival tactic for the pet owner.
One can argue that denial is part of the democratic process. People like Tavleen Singh, Chetan Bhagat, Shekhar Gupta were early promoters of Modi. They chose to ignore the truth of the ‘Gujarat Model’. Now they have changed tack. However, in the case of the electorate, the denial translates into choosing a candidate on parochial issues – like caste, religion – while ignoring the capability of the candidate and her track record of service to the community.
On a side note, there have been deniers of the virulence of Covid, the usefulness of the Covid vaccine and the number of Covid related deaths.
The world stands on the precipice of a climate catastrophe because of decades of denial. The threat of Climate Change gave birth to two types of industries. One that focused on trying to bring down the threat of Climate Change, and the other to deny its existence, and deny the role played by industry and fossil fuels.
The fact that the threat of Climate Change has increased is an irrefutable indication of the success of the ‘Denial Industry’. In fact, their achievement has been such that the lay person has come to believe that they can combat Climate Change and protect the environment by consuming differently instead of consuming less. Thus, the promotion of EV personal transport, energy conservation for white goods like air conditioners and so on.
On the issue of environmental protection, there have been many instances in the recent past when our species has been able to overcome its tendency to deny. The ban on certain pesticides, the mandatory installation, and use, of seat belts are instances where government, people and industry have ‘seen the light’. Unfortunately, in the time taken for changes to occur many lost their lives others had their health irreversibly damaged, and toxic chemicals continued to be pumped into the environment.
Each report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Climate Change has indicated the threat humans are putting themselves in. Then at the Conference of Parties (COP) leaders of nations agree that Climate Change is a threat. But it seems that they are in denial on the extent, consequences, and solutions. Consequently, humans march on towards a precipice of their own creation.
No matter how green the energy, how clean the production process, how conscious the waste disposal process, mankind will not be able to do enough. There is a reason for this, micro-plastics are already in our food system, the food we eat has chemicals in it while the air we breathe polluted. Closer to home, a joint study by National Institute of Oceanography and Toxics Link found that potable water supplied to residents of Panjim is contaminated with micro-plastics. According to the World Economic Forum (WEF), 70% of surface water in India is unfit for consumption.
In other words, instead of resolving existential threats, humans are sabotaging themselves and their future generations. Who would do that? Would anybody do that unless that person was living in denial?
At the end of the day, one has to sleep on the bed one makes, and the human race seems to be getting a good night’s sleep on it.
(Samir Nazareth is an author and writes on socio-economic and environmental issues)
