The People are Revolting

6+

Count de Monet – I come on the most urgent of business. It is said that the people are revolting!

King Louis XVI – You said it, they stink on ice.

History of the World, Part I (1981)

I’m sorry, I couldn’t resist.

But if the willingness of the French to rebel against indignities forced on them by the ruling class is historically predictable, even more so is the fervor with which nominally egalitarian-minded editorial boards like that of the New York Times will defend that class against all comers. Yesterday’s opinion piece from the Times was exactly this kind of tripe (h/t to packmember Mark Kahn). Read it and read it again, because we will see this narrative repeated a thousand times over the next 2-3 decades. Like any abstraction, this one stands in for any legitimate criticism of the outcome of a policy action.

What narrative am I talking about?

“It’s not that the policy was bad. People just misunderstood it, or it was presented the wrong way. Next time we will do it right and it will work.”

It is not just an emerging narrative that will increasingly have the power of the world’s most powerful missionaries behind it – our boldest politicians, popular scientists, authors, entertainers, media members and other luminaries. It is not just condescending. It is also a lie. And like many of the most powerful lies, in this case it exists and will thrive because its adherents believe it serves a Greater Truth: climate change is coming, climate change is real, and the consequences of inaction may be dire.

I believe this Greater Truth really is true. Incidentally, if you work in financial markets and haven’t read Jeremy Grantham’s mid-year note on the subject, I recommend it.

Oh, sure, I entertain some outside chance, like I would with any complex system like climate, that we’ve got it all wrong. It wouldn’t be the first time. But I don’t think it is possible to be a serious person and to deny the compelling evidence of a warming earth and human influence on it any longer. I know some of our readers disagree. Some have probably been waiting for us to be a voice to say that climate change and climate science are just more misleading narratives. Sorry. If that’s what you’re waiting for, you’d better find a comfortable chair.

It is also important, however, that the fact that climate change is real does not mean that climate change! is not also a meme.

How do we tell the difference between the two?

A claim of climate science will be falsifiable and will have stood up to attempts to do disprove it.

A claim of the climate change! meme will be non-falsifiable or will be a social science projection improperly conflated with hard science in order to achieve a desired policy end.

When someone tells you that climate science indicates that it is very likely that continuing to emit greenhouse gases at levels even dramatically below current quantities will result in an increase in mean temperatures, variability in weather and a general rise in sea levels, they are discussing climate science. When someone tells you that not joining this accord or signing that treaty, or not passing this policy or that policy, or not voting for this candidate or that candidate are anti-science, they are promoting the climate change! meme.

I believe it will become increasingly apparent that the predictions about and models for how humans will respond to both climate change and the policy agendas designed to combat it are divorced from the rigor of climate science in profound ways. I don’t think I’m going out on a limb to suggest that the reams of policy research behind the French gas tax probably didn’t accurately predict the ‘yellow vest’ variable. If a simple tax on fuel proves socio-politically problematic, how much more trouble will come from the more dramatic events and policy outcomes being proposed? For example, we do not – we cannot – grasp how an emerging and enormous Indian middle class will respond to being told that they’re going to have to wait a couple decades on widespread air conditioning. And anyone who says they have a robust model for the behavior of billions of other humans emerging from poverty upon being told, “I’m sorry, I know it was your turn to live a life of leisure, comfort, travel, beef and packaged consumer goods, but that’s just not going to happen now” is no scientist. It’s not just about policy responses, either. We simply cannot and are inherently ill-equipped to predict how people will respond to an incredibly complex set of climate change outputs that will manifest in changing prices for real estate, agricultural commodities and labor, even before we consider any explicit policy action.

There is a great deal more to write about this and what we should be doing instead than can be contained in a Brief. I DO think there’s a better solution than the Times’s “The People are Revolting” shtick. I plan to write more about this in the next few editions of the continuation of my little Bayesian series – Notes from the Road.

In the meantime, however, I have a question and a challenge: give some thought to your philosophies as investor and citizen. Think about your most passionate views which began as earnest, scientific, fact-based beliefs. Think about some of those beliefs which encountered resistance. How did you respond? Did you change the way you told the story about them? In doing so, did your beliefs slowly become abstractions of the real thing you believed in originally?

Maybe I’m projecting, but I don’t think so. I think this is common. It’s a well-worn path, but it doesn’t lead to truth. Navigating that road requires clear eyes to see the opinions we drape in fact for what they are. I am convinced that this is even more true for the great tests humanity faces from time to time.

6+

10
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Mark Kahn
Member
Mark Kahn

“In the meantime, however, I have a question and a challenge: give some thought to your philosophies as investor and citizen. Think about your most passionate views which began as earnest, scientific, fact-based beliefs. Think about some of those beliefs which encountered resistance. How did you respond? Did you change the way you told the story about them? In doing so, did your beliefs slowly become abstractions of the real thing you believed in originally?… Read more »

michael gjerde
Member
michael gjerde

I love this post Rusty! Thanks for pointing out the difference between climate change and all the policy memes that swirl around it. There is so much to uncover here with clear eyes and a warm heart that I am so glad to have joined the pack.

2+
chudson
Member
chudson

I was actually meaning to write you via email and ask if you could do a Quid cloud of the climate change! meme. I did some Google Trends analysis on the subject and it looked like the number of searches was down significantly and I wondered if your Quid software was seeing the same things.

2+
Mike S
Member
Mike S

Great conversation… Any change will reduce the paper output, and they don’t want this. It’s not institutional pressure that creates this resistance, it’s that scientists/experts themselves don’t want to move their butts. Noise reduction The new findings led the researchers to hypothesize that when people get very good at a task that requires complex computation, the noise will become smaller and less detrimental to overall performance. That is, people will trust their computations more and… Read more »

Mike S
Member
Mike S

“In the meantime, however, I have a question and a challenge: give some thought to your philosophies as investor and citizen. Think about your most passionate views which began as earnest, scientific, fact-based beliefs.” Losing GOP States Try To Lock In Power Before Democrats Take Over Two years ago, North Carolina set the precedent for this kind of move, when the Republican-controlled legislature stripped then-incoming Democrat Roy Cooper’s power over Cabinet appointments, made the state’s… Read more »

Mark Clark
Member
Mark Clark

The interesting thing about the climate debate is the idea that somehow a warming planet is a disaster, especially for agriculture. Higher CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere increase plant productivity. Is it a coincidence that crop yields are at record levels in conjunction with the highest carbon dioxide levels since the end of the last glacial period of the current ice age and the warmest temperatures of the past 600 years? As someone who has… Read more »

John
Member
John

Respectfully, I think you may have missed something in the Grantham piece. He doesn’t postulate that the real disaster will be running out of fossil fuel before better energy sources are found. In fact, he stipulates that new wind and solar plants have already achieved economic superiority to existing coal and nuclear (even assuming the latter’s initial capex is already paid-off). He also doesn’t mention increased CO2 as a direct threat to agriculture (because, I… Read more »

Mark Clark
Member
Mark Clark

Yes there are lots of threats to agriculture in the future and Grantham makes good points. Soil erosion is controlled easily with the proper tillage techniques so that doesn’t scare me. What really worries me is the depletion of the mined macronutrients, specifically potash and phosphate. That’s a serious problem. The benefits of warmer temperatures far outweigh the negatives for total production. As warmer temps spread toward higher latitudes the growing season will lengthen by… Read more »

JCH
Member
JCH

What struck me was the “They’re Doing It Wrong” reaction by the NYT given that there was no spokesperson(s) for the protesters: “But when the government tried to open talks, there was no one to talk to. Some unofficial interlocutors appeared but were pulled back by threats from other yellow vests. So Mr. Macron and Prime Minister Édouard Philippe were left with no choice but to retreat…” Maybe the NYT was nonplussed and annoyed by… Read more »

Ian VanReepinghen
Member
Ian VanReepinghen

Great note — but to your last paragraph; very hard for typical individuals to carry around or know proof of everything they say; some stuff just is too time consuming to study. WHo has time after work and kids to study everything that’s going on? It’s a meme now but the $400 in the bank stat is kind of real. Maybe retirees and older people have time for this? Yet I don’t see many inspirational,… Read more »

Disclosures

This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements.

The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein.

This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities.

This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.