lunedì 8 marzo 2010

Verso lo scontro con la tragedia

C'è un post estremamente interessante sul blog di "Lou", "The Cost of energy". Si intitola Verso lo scontro con la tragedia. La tesi di Lou è che la situazione dell'economia, dell'ambiente e del clima si è talmente degradata che molta gente si trova alla disperazione. Per questo motivo, alcuni sono arrivati a un livello di violenza verbale e di intimidazione che prelude a un possibile attacco fisico contro gli scienziati.

Non ce la faccio a tradurvi il post di Lou, ma ve lo riassumo brevemente. Parte da una breve selezione di email ricevute dai climatologi e contententi offese scurrili e minacce di morte. Va poi a indicare i nomi di quelli che hanno dato inizio alla campagna. Sono nomi poco noti in Italia, ma assai conosciuti negli Stati Uniti: Marc Morano, Tom Harris, Marc Milloy e altri uomini di "public relations", pagati dalle lobby dei combustibili fossili e che sanno indubbiamente fare il loro mestiere. Ci sono poi i giornalisti come Glenn Beck e Rush Limbaugh che hanno pubblicamente minacciato di morte chi si è dichiarato a favore dell'idea che l'uomo sia la causa del riscaldamento globale. Infine, il senatore James Inhofe, a sua volta, ha minacciato di processare i climatologi come criminali.

Questa serie di attacchi sui media hanno generato una reazione violenta (per il momento solo a livello verbale) da parte di persone evidentemente alla ricerca di un capro espiatorio per i loro guai. A questo proposito, Lou dice:

"Le persone responsabili per questi atti si sono convinti che il loro modo di vivere, le loro stesse vite, addirittura, sono minacciate da un qualche "Innominabile Entità Malvagia Esterna". Ci sono sempre persone del genere in giro, gente che vive uno spazio negativo e che definiscono se stessi per quello che odiano invece di quello che amano. Per alcuni di loro, il gruppo scelto per entrare nella categoria dell'Entità Malvagia Esterna è quello degli scienziati del clima e di quelli che vorrebbero che tutti noi agissimo in accordo con quello che gli scienziati dicono che dovremmo fare per minimizzare l'impatto umano sul cambiamento climatico."

Vale la pena di leggere il post  per il puro orrore di vedere svilupparsi una situazione di "caccia alle streghe" ormai fuori controllo ma che non è nata per caso. Qualcuno ha soffiato sul fuoco; qualcuno ha voluto questa campagna di odio. Non c'è di che stupirsene: non è certo la prima volta che qualcuno utilizza le tendenze aggressive di persone emotivamente poco stabili per avanzare una tesi politica. Ultimamente, questo modo di agire lo abbiamo chiamato "terrorismo." Per ora, nel dibattito sul cambiamento climatico il terrorismo si limita all'intimidazione, ma queste cose fanno alla svelta a passare ai fatti.


_____________________________

Vi passo un pezzetto da "Climate Progress" che da un'idea di dove siamo arrivati.


One scientist was called a 

Loudmouth, arrogant, conceited, ignorant wanker”.

The emails frequently accuse the scientists of being frauds who manipulate their research in order to receive funding, such as this one to Ben McNeil at the UNSW:

“It’s so obvious you are an activist going along with the climate change lie to protect your very lucrative employment contract.”

They often blame the recipients of being guilty of crimes, as in this one received by Professor David Karoly at the University of Melbourne:

“It is probably not to (sic) extreme to suggest that your actions (deceitful) were so criminal to be compared with Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. It is called treason and genocide.

“Oh, as a scientist, you have destroyed peoples trust in my profession. You are a criminal . Lest we forget.”

Receiving emails like these is unsettling and at times disturbing, which of course is the point. They become worrying when they cross the line to personal threats, such as these sent to Professor Andy Pitman at the UNSW:

“There will be a day of facing the music for the Pitman type frauds… Pitman you are a f**king fool!”

And this one:

“If we see you continue, we will get extremely organised and precise against you.”

When Pitman politely replied to the last, the response was more aggressive:

“F**k off mate, stop the personal attacks. Just do your science or you will end up collateral damage in the war, GET IT.”

All threats have to be taken seriously, and at times warrant calling in the police. The police are able to trace anonymous emails to their sources and take action against those who send them. The police are now advising those who received abusive and threatening emails to resist the immediate urge to delete them and keep them in a separate folder for future reference.

Climate campaigners have also noticed a surge in the frequency and virulence of this new form of cyber-bullying. The following was received by a young woman (who asked that her name not be used):

“Did you want to offer your children to be brutally gang-raped and then horribly tortured before being reminded of their parents socialist beliefs and actions?

“Burn in hell. Or in the main street, when the Australian public finally lynchs you.”

Another campaigner opened her inbox to read this:

“F**k off!!! Or you will be chased down the street with burning stakes and hung from your f**king neck, until you are dead, dead, dead!

“F**k you little pieces of sh*t, show youselves in public!!!”

Greens Senator Christine Milne told me that senators’ inboxes are bombarded every day by climate deniers and extremists, so that now they are running at least 10 to one against those who call for action on climate change.

She describes it as a “well-organised campaign of strident, offensive and insulting emails that go well beyond the bounds of the normal cut and thrust of politics”.

It was widely reported that in the days before the Liberal Party leadership challenge last November, MPs were blitzed with emails from climate deniers. 

Some MPs were spooked into voting for Tony Abbott, the only one of the three contenders who had repudiated climate science. Australia’s alternative government is now led by climate deniers.

Journalists hit

Journalists too have become the victims of cyber-bullying. I have spoken to several, off the record, who have told of torrents of abusive emails when they report on climate change, including some sufficiently threatening for them to consult their supervisors and consider police action.

One was particularly disturbed at references to his wife. Another received the following from someone who gave his name and identified himself as medical representative at major pharmaceutical’s company:

“You sad sack of s**t. It’s ok to trash climate change sceptics yet, when the shoe is on the other foot, you become a vindictive, nasty piece of s**t not able to face the fact that you’re wrong about climate change and you’re reputation is now trash.”

Anonymous emails are usually more graphic.

“Your mother was a goat f**ker!!!!!! Your father was a turd!!!!!!! You will be one of the first taken out in the revolution!!!!!!!! Your head will be on a stake!! C**t!”

Few of those on the receiving end of this hatred doubt that the emails are being orchestrated. Scores of abusive emails over a few hours are unlikely to be the product of a large number of individuals spontaneously making the effort to track down an email address and pour forth their rage.

While some individuals act alone, increasingly the attacks are arranged by one or more denialist organisations. It’s fair to assume operatives in these organisations constantly monitor the media and, when a story or interview they don’t like appears, send messages out to lists of supporters, linking to the comments, providing the scientist’s email address and urging them to let him or her know what they think.

One or two of the cyber-bullies have hinted at the level of organisation, with one following an abusive rant with the comment: “Copies of my e-mails to you are also being passed out to a huge network for future reference.”