Written By:
- Date published:
12:18 pm, July 13th, 2026 - 37 comments
Categories: climate change -
Tags: hope, how change happens, Tania Waikato
You’d have to be blind to miss the climate crisis now. Heatwaves in Europe killing thousands of people. Floods in New Zealand in the same places over and over. Insurance companies radically rethinking their business plans. The right looking increasingly like the climate clowns they are. Crunch time is coming, but it’s not a set date, rather an unrolling and an unravelling over time, with people realising in stages and at different paces.
I could write a bunch of stuff about the terrible prognosis, but we can all look that up ourselves. If we want to see.
Instead, I’m going write some random thoughts on where the hope still lies.
The biggest challenges aren’t technical, they’re sociopolitical. Social in the sense some people still think partisan politics and personal beliefs about the world matter more than climate collapse. Political because our democracies are bound into 3, 4, 5 year terms that prevent politicians leading faster, and people still vote in the parties that are resisting or blocking transition.
In New Zealand, one hope is in changing the government in November, and changing it to something really good. It’s not enough to rely on National being shit, we need to build up the centre left. For those that can, Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori all can do with extra support, whether that’s donations, volunteering, sharing on social media, talking to family, friends, colleagues. It all helps.
Labour have just released a kick arse solar policy. Tell people about how great it is. Keep an eye out for any good thing that the three progressive parties are doing, and yell it out loud. We want them to get as many votes as possible, people vote for things they like and respect.
In terms of the bigger picture, I don’t believe capitalism will survive climate collapse, and it probably won’t survive the polycrisis even if we do change. We are on a trajectory for tragedy. But, importantly, changing the narratives can give us a better chance of transitioning to something that lessens that tragedy, and might even improve many lives.
Capitalism =/= commerce. We don’t give up all ways of trade and innovation if we do something other than capitalism.
People defend capitalism because they confuse it with commerce. They believe “capitalism” is when people start businesses and sell things.
If people understood that the thing they call capitalism and love so much is actually just commerce and that it’s not the same thing as capitalism, they would feel very different.
Anti-capitalist narratives matter, but more important now is what we could have instead. Too many people are clinging to capitalism because they’ve been told the only alternative is nasty, brutish and short. Get acquainted with Doughnut Economics, Degrowth, Powerdown, and other economics that are based on regeneration rather than trashing our earth.
It’s not enough to say fuck this shit, but it’s necessary to start with. We then have to tell a different story, one that people want, that inspires hope, and opens the door to something better than denial or doom.
I’ve written about this a fair bit, listed below, these aren’t the only stories. But the stories have to be grounded in the realities of the physical world. Climate change is here, now, it’s going to get a lot lot worse if we don’t radically change, and here’s the door to that change. Don’t be afraid to step through.
Tania Waikato, lawyer, activist and Green Party candidate, telling a different story,
The power of kotahitanga is burning bright for Matariki.
I didn’t even think twice about this post when I put it up yesterday but now it’s gone viral with almost 400,000 views and the comments section is full of people celebrating what UNITES US instead of what DIVIDED US.
What that tells me is that we are sick of the hatred.
We are sick of the division.
We remember when our country was all about helping each other out when times are hard, and looking after our neighbours.
We remember how we stand up for what is right, even when other countries do not.
We remember how we look after our beautiful oceans and beaches and rivers and streams.
We remember why so many of us have shared ancestry and are the walking, talking, breathing embodiments of Te Tiriti.
Hope is a flame. And it’s still burning bright and strong here in Aotearoa.
Come November 7th, you will see this fire spread and usher in a new era for our country grounded in the values that we still hold deep in our hearts.
Because no amount of money or billionaire meddling can buy what this Matariki expressed –
Whanaungatanga. Connection. Between us all.
Mānawatia a Matariki
Given that behaviour is driven by both situation and cognition, how we respond to shit depends on framing we use – to ourselves, instinctively, and to others, sharingly. A helpful lens is available here: https://learninginplaces.org/frameworks/relationships-in-socio-ecological-systems-framework/
It's a simple portal. Sense-making as focus endows it with scaling influence across generations, so the format is resilience-based. In regard to your stance, hope is likely to be boosted if educators shift toward resilience as a durable state of mind informed by personal expertise and social interaction. Interdependence is their site focus, a learning curve that achieves praxis for few of us due to the culture of individualism having prevailed the past century. I hope educators realise the salience of human relations being part-subliminal, part-conscious. Co-dependency between partners is normal and emerges instinctively, yet we act alone as often as together, so any new political paradigm must focus on the person/other/group triad as the relational basis of sociopolitical behaviour…
In my view the best way to mitigate climate change and the negative impacts it is having on our infrastructure is to reinstate a 21st century Ministry of Works………we used to have one which was drowned on the incoming tide of the mantra that govt should not be in the business of business…..meaning leave commerce to the corporations and the private sector…..look how well that has turned out……
Suggested reading for those that may have missed this excellent article:
https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2023/03/28/What-was-so-great-about-the-ministry-of-works.html
So, yes… intercourse this scat and lets get back:
It will be interesting to see the extent of any mass motivation toward voting. Voter apathy is normally driven by insight that nothing much intelligent happens as a result.
Engagement seems inversely proportional to this inertial effect of cynicism: hope prevails over learned experience, wishing is powerful as personal escapism. I noticed this from the retired archdruid:
Doomsters get contagion easily but their effect seems ephemeral. Blows away in the next breeze. Hope springs eternal! Like a font deep within…
"climate clowns"
That's good, thanks, weka.
"The power of kotahitanga is burning bright for Matariki."
Good also, thanks, Tania.
I reckon "mana" is the essential kupu Māori.
But please don't say, "We are sick of the division."
This implores us to be sick. We must be well; we are well! Even "tired of" – we don't want to be tired, we want to be energised, filled with mana!
"Hope is a flame. And it’s still burning bright and strong here in Aotearoa."
We are a-flame! No construct can withstand the flaming flame!
A very good and important Post!
I don’t quite follow here. Such a position is a belief too, isn’t it? Or is this meant as a meta statement, about believing a system/collection of beliefs?
The scientific fact is climate collapse will not hurt only those whose personal politics and beliefs acknowledge that it is happening, it will affect everyone regardless.
It doesn’t seem to me to be criticism of or about any set of beliefs per se.
thanks Incognito.
That sentence is probably better understood as a whole,
I was reading this before I wrote the post,
https://x.com/StoneSculptorJN/status/2075740707218702392
It's a form of climate denial, but I was struck by the layers in that. He objects to the working class being taxed to fund green energy investments, which has some validity. But he also doesn't think it will stop climate change. So not outright denial. But still not willing to act in the right direction (I so want people to explain this. I don't have children but I can't imagine holding a position that will basically destroying one's children's future so that we can be more comfortable now. So I assume it is a form of denial about how bad the crisis is).
None of that matters in terms of whether climate change will destroy his life (or if he is lucky his children's lives).
So in that sense, climate change exists whether we believe in it or not, and the ways out of the mess exist whether we believe in them or not. The problem with belief is to what extent it blocks good and useful change.
I found worrying about taxation bizarre compared to worrying about climate collapse.
Okay, thanks.
It does get more confusing if clear and well-understood terms undergo slippage of meaning. My ‘definition’ of climate change denial is the refusal to acknowledge & accept the growing scientific evidence (which is and never will be absolute).
I think of the main problems of getting meaningful change is, as with many big & daunting problems, a feeling of being powerless in the face of a huge threat. This feeling also operates at nation level, e.g., NZ is too small and insignificant to do anything meaningful [on a global scale]. This narrative is persistent & persuasive in media and has a large influence on our individual & collective attitudes. So, to avoid feeling distressed about feeling powerless in the face of this growing threat, people resort to escapism & evasion (e.g. ‘bread & circuses’ such as ABs, FIFA WC, Taylor Swift’s marriage, Trump tragedy, etc.) and avoidance. The final straw nudging people into utter inertia is the narrative & perception that any action will hurt you in the pocket now and even more so later on. So, it’s a perfect combination of manufactured psychological and economic reasons & excuses to do SFA, more or less.
I largely agree with your analysis of feeling powerless. However I think there is also a level of denial, and this does fit in with your definition of "refusal to acknowledge & accept the growing scientific evidence"
It's not outright denial of AGW. It's the denial of the seriousness and timing.
There are people who feel powerless, are under a lot of financial stress, and still believe we should act radically now. But I'm mindful of an online friend who said to me during the early years of the pandemic that people had to deal with the realities of that and climate action could come later. That's a form of denial. If your kids are in a burning house, and you have the flu, you don't wait until you have recovered to save them (rather inept analogy, but the flu here is whatever stressor people have that makes them think climate can wait).
I think the problem there is that many people just don't believe it is that bad. They don't believe the house is on fire and if we don't act now it will burn down. So yes, feeling powerless and cognitive dissonance allow people to switch off, but its a kind of insanity. We are not powerless. We will have to give things up.
I just can't bring myself to believe that people with kids in particular are thinking yeah, I want to keep this standard of living now and my kids/grandkids will have terrible lives later on. Denial makes more sense (and cognitive dissonance)
I would characterize this more as (for those who believe or suspect that climate change is a real issue) – 'I want to keep this standard of living now, so my kids will be set up with a competitive advantage if/when things go to custard later on.'
All of those people with holiday homes and international refuges in NZ – would fit into this category. 'I can continue having my jet set lifestyle, while resourcing a rural bunker if/when needed'
Yes, there are many degrees of denial of AGW, which is why I personally preserve the term for outright denial where the door is and remains firmly shut.
The issue that you mention is that it’s harder to obtain consensus, scientifically, in the first place, about the level of seriousness and timing. I think that any ‘doom’s day’ scenarios and associated thinking are, well, doomed. An example, some people do get quite upset if there’s a severe weather warning and it turns out to be much less severe (and vice versa too). Some authorities even don’t want to call a state of emergency when land & livelihood is already besieged. The Plan B crowd during the pandemic typified this kind of what you call ‘insanity’.
Not "Climate Change".
Human caused, anthropogic, Global warming. AGW! Climate change is a euthemism!
It is not a "belief"!
AGW is a fact.
As certain as gravity, evolution, or the sun rising in the morning.
If you look, you can see the evidence all around you.
What some people “believe” is irrevelent. It is going to happen, regardless of their fantasies.
Yes, no matter what government we get, the oceans will keep warming and the environmental effects of that will be massive.
It makes all the talk of trade deals and growth totally pointless.
Endless growth is a characteristic of harmful viruses.
Vaccination is normally required.
Warts are the result of viruses. Vaccination doesn't play a role in getting rid of them. What's needed to be done is to alert the host (body) to the presence of the cleverly-disguised virus, by injuring the structure. The body's inherent "clean-up" squad will do the rest; that's why a doctor will "burn" the wart with liquid nitrogen.
I think this process should be encouraging for protesters on any issue. Protesters themselves don't need to destroy the "virus"; mining, dairying, political donations etc. they just have to injure them and draw attention to them so that the host, society, can act.
Ages of civilisation
Götterdämmerung is a German noun that translates literally to "twilight of the gods". Figuratively, it refers to a cataclysmic, world-altering destruction, such as the violent collapse of a society, regime, or institution.
Mythological Roots: The word was coined as a German translation of the Old Norse Ragnarök.
A habitat for life that evolved on a planet
Destruction of that habitat
Population decline
(decline of male fertility and delay of women having children)
Technocracy oligarchy
the dome of space habitation is their hidden plan for silos on earth (special environments on earth) for the few not the many.
rise of AI and robotics to supplant dependence on most of the working class and middle class.
What I don't understand is why the middle class are so suicidal, they have to know that this Heavy Weather is not worried about how well off you are, or the connections you have, or indeed where you live. Heavy weather really does not have any emotional or intellectual skin in the game.
What is real is the Parasite class is tethered to Liberalism, no matter how it warps and deforms as an ideology. With the middle class hitching their wagon to this class, I can only guess as some form of protection. They will doom us all.
If the middle class actually sided with the majority of people, the changes and direction we are heading could turn quite quickly. This is the real challenge – Heavy Weather is real now, and on going.
Sadly omissions keep rising. With the Heavy, in Heavy Weather only increasing in weight – the longer the middle class keep supporting the Parasite class.
Sadly for your analysis, it appears that the working class do not predominately vote for left-wing parties (if you exclude Labour as being neo-liberal, as you so often do).
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00323187.2026.2659613#d1e1509
In fact, the majority of people (including the majority of the 'working class') vote for Labour and National parties – the neoliberal parties, tending towards the centre.
The 'middle class' have no 'people' to side with. There is no party in NZ which has significant popular support for a massive climate change policy agenda. The closest is the GP, which hover around 11% Matched (and sometimes exceeded) by NZF and ACT – both of whom can be characterized as climate change denial (or at best mitigation) parties.
not to mention taht the working class aren't anymore committed to climate action than other group of people.
The working class are committed to survival, and they get Heavy Weather, not climate action.
Plenty of working class people are doing ok enough to have time to think about climate action but aren't. Yes there are people who don't have that capacity, but there are those that do. What is their excuse?
What does Heavy Weather stand for?
The easiest effective action for this demographic to take is to vote, overwhelmingly, for the Green Party (the party with the strongest environmental credentials) in this election.
They are (according to the polls) not planning on doing so.
Which, makes you wonder if climate action is really so important for them.
Of course climate action is really so important to them – have you not been paying attention to what the Greens have been saying since forever???
The have to though, take their audience into account; if banging-on about something causes your intended supporters to support someone else, you'd be wise to tone down the rhetoric, for the greatest good.
she was talking about the working class not the Green Party. It seems very likely that there are plenty of people in the working class that don't rate climate as that important or they'd be voting for parties with good climate policies. And they're not doing that.
Climate Change is the 9th most important issue facing New Zealanders and 14% are concerned about it (whatever that means).
https://www.ipsos.com/en-nz/ipsos-new-zealand-32nd-issues-monitor
Thus demonstrating my point.
If the GP need to 'tone down the rhetoric' about climate change to appeal to the working class; then climate change isn't of overwhelming importance to that demographic.
Counter to Muttonbird's assertion.
Nothing to do with me, I haven't yet commented in this thread.
But since you have invited me; the Greens have very strong social policy, weaving it inseparable from climate policy. For them, as far as I can tell, policy which benefits climate sustainability is synonymous with policy which benefits societal sustainability.
This of course is much to the annoyance of Teals and RW part time environmentalist voters who call the Greens watermelons and want them to stick to their knitting, be a single issue party, and forget altogether advocating for the disenfranchised.
Seems your comment is designed to drive a wedge between climate concern and working class concern. Can't say I'm surprised.
The other thing is that while most people have enough on their plate dealing with either continuing to be fifty rich or just barely surviving it ids the activists which draw us all to the importance of behaviour change well before the rest of us realise it.
For instance would farmers in this country give a shit about fresh water quality if iwi and environmentalists had not demanded it?
My sincere apologies for mis-attributing comments to you.
And also for not responding sooner – I've been down with some RSV variant for over 3 weeks – so not keeping up with online comments.
"For instance would farmers in this country give a shit about fresh water quality if iwi and environmentalists had not demanded it?"
No, they would not. Just look back to times when "iwi and environmentalists" had no discernible voice – what did farmers do? Farm/Destroy – that's it.
some of the working class don't have much choice. But agree of those that do, mostly people don't care that much or don't think it's real enough.
All of them (with minor exceptions) have the ability to vote. And choosing to exercise this right – to vote for the GP – is the least difficult action they can personally take – if Muttonbird is right, and "heavy weather" is of overwhelming importance to them.
I agree with you. Most people (not just in this demographic) simply don't believe that climate change is that urgent an issue.
And it seems most Kiwis can't or won't link ecological overshoot (of which global warming and resulting climate change are symptoms) to cost-of-living issues – they're laser-focused on staying or getting ahead.
Here's an analysis of NZ's approach to anthropogenic global warming.
Hmm, "far-sighted political leadership" – too much to ask of our CEO?
Pfft – by 2030, $ir Chri$ will be back to his CEO roots, 'earning' real money.
Wow just wow – bugger me, we gotta all be in the same game.
Can't be critical of the game.
Can't have the poor saying anything out of order can we…
Cheers weka, good post.
A couple of thoughts/replies to comments above.
@Adam, as to why the middle class is not changing habits, they will feel they are. EVs, solar panels, veganism etc are a change that doesn't cause inconvenience.
I have long argued that at the root of our biggest obstacles to overcome is convenience. It's easy to have the hot water heated by a gas califont strapped to the exterior of the house and get gas bottles delivered. Much less convenient to use a solid fuel heater, diesel/waste oil burner to heat the water.
Highly convenient to go to the duopoly and pay way over the odds for food out of season with ridiculous amounts of diesel miles embedded into it. Ukranian sultana biscuits anyone? American oranges?
I was talking to my rather 'mainstream' brother in law yesty, the day after a Matariki hangi we did for his church. Out of the blue he started talking about 'Enough', a book by Jeanette Fitzsimmons. Then he mentioned a circular economy.
I feel the awareness is out there, a leadership that heeds people and the environment rather than the myth that is the 'economy' will help for this knowledge to coalesce and manifest into action.
Out of the blue he started talking about 'Enough', a book by Jeanette Fitzsimmons. Then he mentioned a circular economy.
Seems evidence of a trend toward transcendence in a mainstreamer. Circularity in the economy derives from recycling, which became part of normalcy decades back. Dunno if her book shows scaling of thought beyond such basics – she always seemed insufficiently radical to me. I suppose I'd better try to hunt it out anyway.
Cradle to Cradle extended recycling ethos thoroughly into ideology, huh? Nowadays other key concepts of Green thought are likely to provide more catalytic potential.
Since resonance happens in natural and social systems and contexts, interpersonal relations and group psychodynamics will get any activist way more traction: gnosis applies to left/right & center regardless of idiosyncrasy. So I'm developing field theory.
nice story about your brother in law, thanks.