In the world today, it is impossible for issues of climate change\u2019s magnitude to be isolated from politics.\u00a0 The government is the body within the United States and most other countries which has the power to impose regulations on the people within its jurisdiction.\u00a0 Thus it is the government which needs to create and uphold standards of environmental protection in order for people to actually change their ways of life.\u00a0 Ironically, now more than ever in recent history, the United States government is polarized on almost all large issues, especially climate change.\u00a0 This division results in discussions which end with the decision that \u201cmore research is needed\u201d rather than a call to collective action to prevent the predicted disastrous effects of climate change from occurring.<\/p>\n
In addition to the fact that elected officials constantly debate the degree of climate change and what the global community should or should not do about it, the media portrays this apparent confusion to the general public.\u00a0 Although politicians argue about climate change because they are first and foremost worried about their political agendas and personal industry interests, it appears to the general public that they disagree on the scientific proof.\u00a0 In the book Merchants of Doubt<\/em> <\/a>by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, they show this disconnect over and over.\u00a0 The scientists and politicians are fully aware that climate change is occurring; it is simply not in some of their interests to support actions to slow its effects.\u00a0 Almost every day there are articles in The New York Times, among other major news outlets, which show the degree to which climate change has been politicized.\u00a0 For example, The New York Times article, \u201cStung by the President on Air Quality, Environmentalists Weigh Their Options\u201d<\/a> by Leslie Kaufman discusses how environmentalists view Obama after he announced less stringent ozone pollutant standards and because of his current discussions about the Keystone XL Pipeline over the past week.\u00a0 Many environmentalists see these acts as \u201cbrazen political sellouts to business interests and the Republican Party\u201d (Kaufman, New York Times<\/em>).\u00a0 Kaufman adds \u201cthat in the current climate there is little chance that environmentalists or their allies will ever side with the Republicans\u201d (Kaufman, New York Times<\/em>).\u00a0 Clearly, climate science and politics are closely intertwined despite the fact that together they stall the country from taking action.<\/p>\n Not only is climate change a politically charged topic in the United States, but it is also a global political issue.\u00a0 Although the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change holds the task of presenting scientific information relating to climate change, their \u201cwork has been heavily politicized from the onset\u201d (Bulkeley et al. 27).\u00a0 This is because each member of this global organization, scientists and non-scientists alike, comes from a country with specific interests and economic situations.\u00a0 Everything that is included and not included in the products of the IPCC and other global organizations is influenced by the politics and power of those involved.\u00a0 On all levels of governance, climate change is as much a political topic as a scientific one.\u00a0 The current result of this mixture is a misinformed and divided public and a stalemate between liberals and conservatives on a national and global level.\u00a0<\/p>\n References:\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n