I myself see the hand of climate change in the Trump victory.
We tend to think of climate change as the burning of fossil fuels creating excess greenhouse gases which warm our environment, resulting in warmer temperatures, loss of glacial and sea ice, and more extreme storms. And all of that is correct and true, but it also leaves out an important factor.
And that important factor is human population growth. A significant reason why we use fossil fuels to the dangerous extent we do is because we have more people on our planet. And each of those humans born wants to heat or cool their home, charge up their iPhones, and drive a car to the store. (Remember: no individual drop of water thinks it is responsible for the flood.)
Here are some data to help understand this phenomenon:
1804 — the global human population reaches 1 billion (estimated).
1927 — the global human population reaches 2 billion.
1960 — the global human population reaches 3 billion.
1974 — the global human population reaches 4 billion.
1987 — the global human population reaches 5 billion.
1999 — the global human population reaches 6 billion.
2011 — the global human population reaches 7 billion.
2022 — the global human population reaches 8 billion.
Note Well that recently the earthly human population increases by 1 billion every 11-12 years. Which means that we can expect 9 billion people on earth around 2033 or so, and 10 billion people on earth by 2045 (assuming no change in our current conditions).
When Americans to look at the tent-cities appearing on the sidewalks of our major cities, do they think “boy there are a lot more people around than when I was growing up”, or do they think “our government has failed to provide housing? When Americans hear about caravans of migrants at our southern border, do they think “we are being replaced”, or do they think “mass migrations can be expected as a result of climate change? When Americans are confronted with a novel infectious pandemic, do they think “the government botched the response to the pandemic”, or do they think “too many people encroaching on animal habitats will result in new emerging and potentially dangerous human infections”? And which of these explanations will be exploited by fascist seeking to overthrow a democracy?
Back in 2012, the US military released the results of its first study of the potential threat of climate change to US national security. Among the reported potential dangers are threats to civilian infrastructure from storms, water and food insecurity, mass migrations, civil unrest, and wars. The report authors also predicted that governments across the globe would become increasingly authoritarian to better manage and cope with larger populations and climate chaos.
And just as the physical manifestations of climate change (more extreme storms; rising temperatures; loss of snow and ice; etc.) are occurring sooner than was initially predicted by climate scientists, it appears that the changeover from democracy to authoritarian government has also occurred here in the USA sooner than anyone predicted. I myself doubt that many Trump voters specifically want an end to democracy, but I do imagine that most of them want a stronger government that would take more forceful action to make the problem of immigration or homelessness go away. But even a King Trump cannot reverse the effects of continued population growth, anymore than King Canute can order the tide to go out.
For a number of years now, I have suggested here at dKos that the two greatest dangers to US democracy and security are climate change and a system of government that allows the wealthy few to literally buy the legislators — and indeed the very laws — the wealthy want. As I see it, these two malignant forces have now sadly combined to end our American experiment in democracy.
