Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Annals of the American Association of Geographers on 6/2/2019, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24694452.2018.1547567
Accepted author manuscript, 645 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Speaking Power to ‘Post-Truth’
T2 - Critical Political Ecology and the New Authoritarianism
AU - Neimark, Benjamin David
AU - Childs, John Robert
AU - Nightingale, Andrea
AU - Cavanagh, Connor
AU - Sullivan, Sian
AU - Benjaminsen, Tor
AU - Batterbury, Simon
AU - Koot, Stasja
AU - Harcourt, Wendy
N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Annals of the American Association of Geographers on 6/2/2019, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24694452.2018.1547567
PY - 2019/3/4
Y1 - 2019/3/4
N2 - Given a history in political ecology of challenging hegemonic “scientific” narratives concerning environmental problems, the current political moment presents a potent conundrum: how to (continue to) critically engage with narratives of environmental change while confronting the “populist” promotion of “alternative facts.” We ask how political ecologists might situate themselves vis-à-vis the presently growing power of contemporary authoritarian forms, highlighting how the latter operates through sociopolitical domains and beyond-human natures. We argue for a clear and conscious strategy of speaking power to post-truth, to enable two things. The first is to come to terms with an internal paradox of addressing those seeking to obfuscate or deny environmental degradation and social injustice, while retaining political ecology’s own historical critique of the privileged role of Western science and expert knowledge in determining dominant forms of environmental governance. This involves understanding post-truth, and its twin pillars of alternative facts and fake news, as operating politically by those regimes looking to shore up power, rather than as embodying a coherent mode of ontological reasoning regarding the nature of reality. Second, we differentiate post-truth from analyses affirming diversity in both knowledge and reality (i.e., epistemology and ontology, respectively) regarding the drivers of environmental change. This enables a critical confrontation of contemporary authoritarianism and still allows for a relevant and accessible political ecology that engages with marginalized populations likely to suffer most from the proliferation of post-truth politics.
AB - Given a history in political ecology of challenging hegemonic “scientific” narratives concerning environmental problems, the current political moment presents a potent conundrum: how to (continue to) critically engage with narratives of environmental change while confronting the “populist” promotion of “alternative facts.” We ask how political ecologists might situate themselves vis-à-vis the presently growing power of contemporary authoritarian forms, highlighting how the latter operates through sociopolitical domains and beyond-human natures. We argue for a clear and conscious strategy of speaking power to post-truth, to enable two things. The first is to come to terms with an internal paradox of addressing those seeking to obfuscate or deny environmental degradation and social injustice, while retaining political ecology’s own historical critique of the privileged role of Western science and expert knowledge in determining dominant forms of environmental governance. This involves understanding post-truth, and its twin pillars of alternative facts and fake news, as operating politically by those regimes looking to shore up power, rather than as embodying a coherent mode of ontological reasoning regarding the nature of reality. Second, we differentiate post-truth from analyses affirming diversity in both knowledge and reality (i.e., epistemology and ontology, respectively) regarding the drivers of environmental change. This enables a critical confrontation of contemporary authoritarianism and still allows for a relevant and accessible political ecology that engages with marginalized populations likely to suffer most from the proliferation of post-truth politics.
KW - authoritarianism
KW - environmental policy
KW - political ecology
KW - post-truth
KW - science
U2 - 10.1080/24694452.2018.1547567
DO - 10.1080/24694452.2018.1547567
M3 - Journal article
VL - 109
SP - 613
EP - 623
JO - Annals of the Association of American Geographers
JF - Annals of the Association of American Geographers
SN - 0004-5608
IS - 2
ER -