Has the use of apocalyptic narrative explanations by climate activists broadened the window of political opportunities for the swedish Green Party?

(1)

Master thesis, 15 hp

Master’s Programme of Political Science / Master’s Thesis in Political Science, 15 hp Spring Term 2020

(2)

Abstract

Using thematic analysis, this study aims to find out if this broadened use of apocalyptic narrative explanations by the current climate change movement has spread to the swedish Green Party, which was chosen because the Green Party is the political party with the closest connection to the modern climate change movement, in terms of ideas and believes but also open support for the movement. Furthermore, this thesis discusses whether or not a change in the window of political opportunities regarding policy suggestions (Overton window) could be detected in relation to this use of apocalyptic narrative explanations. As underlying material three influential representative activist’s speeches - Greta Thunberg, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez and Luisa Neubauer - were chosen as well as the Green Party’s manifestos for the European Parliament elections of 2014 and 2019. The results show that, even though the party has noticeably increased its use of apocalyptic narrative explanations in the latter manifesto, there seems to be no serious change towards more radical or previously

unthinkable policy suggestions.

(3)

1. Introduction

Environmental activism is undeniably not a new phenomenon anywhere on the planet.

However, over the recent years environmental activism has gotten a lot of attention, not least due to swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg and her Fridays For Future movement as well as other charismatic characters in the currently active climate change movement. One important aim for these climate change movements, in addition to creating awareness and changes in behavioural patterns, is to achieve political changes in favour of their values and beliefs, for example by manifesting themselves through forms of protest. (Olzak et al. 2009.

P. 203)

As later identified in this study, research on social movement impact on the political sphere, tends to primarily focus on social movements influence on policy changes with the help of movement organization, movement activities, public opinion and elements of the political opportunity structure. Nevertheless, an aspect which so far has not been so common to include in this field of research is the impact the climate change movement can have on parties’ attainable policy suggestions (Overton’s window of possibilities) based on their selected use of apocalyptic narrative explanations (a rhetorical tool some representatives of the movement have been accused of applying) and themes of concern. Consequently, the focus of the following study is the impact of the climate change movement’s use of apocalyptic narrative explanations and choices of issues to talk about, on political parties.

To be able to analyse this three young activists were chosen, Greta Thunberg, Luisa Neubauer and Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez, who will be representing this modern climate change movement based on their dominant positions within today’s movement and their roles as representative speakers. To examine their potential impact on political parties, on the other hand, the Swedish Green Party was decided on, since environmental issues are at the heart of their agenda. Ergo, in theory this should be the party where the impact would be the most visible. Representative for their potential adjustment to the climate movement will be the manifestos from before and after the rise of the Fridays For Future movement in 2018.

Unfortunately, neither of these manifestos have official authors, undoubtedly because the party should stand united behind its contents, which makes it difficult to ask the authors

(5)

directly about potential influence from the climate change movement. Nevertheless, two of the current members in the European parliament for the swedish Green Party, namely Alice Bah Kuhnke and Pär Holmgren (Europaparlamentet. 2019), who unfortunately were not available for interviews, have expressed themselves positively towards Greta Thunberg and her Fridays for Future movement. Alice Bah Kuhnke even mentioned in an interview with the swedish newsagency TV4, that the Green Party now has the chance to gain the followers as voters, stating: “What Greta Thunberg has done is fantastic. Her, along with 100 000s of children, young adults and their parents all over the world, have made that we, as politicians and political party, which was formed on the basis of environmental and climate issues, have all the reasons to actually keep on fighting for the environment and the climate. And because of [Greta Thunberg’s movement] we are so hopeful, now that there are many more who actually understand [the climate issue]. Many voters want the European Parliament to pursue powerful climate and environmental policies. So now, we [the Green Party] who formed almost 40 years ago have gotten high chances to pick up those feelings and those who want so much more.” (Nyhetsmorgon. 2019. 1:50-3:03. Author’s translation) ¹

Likewise Pär Holmgren stated: “All these demonstrations are fantastically important. It is about building a critical mass in the long run and when there are enough people who want to see a change in politics, in the market and in our behaviors, then, in the end there actually will be a change. [...] It is incredibly important that this movement grows and that we reach this critical mass as quickly as possible.” (Expressen. 2019. 0:45-1:41. Author’s translation) ² By formulating this the way Pär Holmgren did, saying the first-person plural in the last sentence, he assumed his party - and likely their voters - to be part of the climate change movement, which shows approvement of their beliefs and actions. This in turn shows, that

1 Original quote: “Det Greta Thunberg har gjort, det är ju något fantastiskt. Hon tillsammans med de 100 000-tals barn och unga världen över och deras föräldrar har gjort att vi som politiker och politiskt parti - som bildades utifrån miljö- och klimatfrågorna - att vi har all anledning till att faktiskt fortsätta kämpa för klimatet och miljön. Just för [Greta Thunbergs rörelse] är det så hoppfullt nu att det finns så många fler som faktiskt förstår [klimatproblemet]. Många väljare som vill att Eu-parlamentet ska driva en kraftfull klimat och

miljöpolitik. Så nu har vi som bildades snart 40 år sedan fått stora chanser att fånga upp de här känslorna och de som vill så mycket.”

2 Original quote: “Alla de här demonstrationerna är ju såklart fantastiskt viktiga. Det handlar om att på sikt bygga en kritisk massa och när det blir tillräckligt många människor som vill se en förändring i politik, i marknaden och i våra beteenden så blir det faktiskt till slut också en förändring. [...] Det är ju fantastiskt viktigt att den rörelsen växer och att vi når den här kritiska massan så fort som möjligt.”

(6)

there is a big potential that, both the Green Party’s policy suggestions and way of conveying them to the voters has been influenced by the movement over the last couple of years.

2. Aim of the thesis

The aim of this thesis is to examine whether or not the current climate change movement - in particular frontrow activists like Greta Thunberg, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez and Luisa Neubauer - helped to shift the “Overton window of possibilities” concerning climate change policy suggestions in the swedish Green Party in a more radical direction through apocalyptic narrative explanation approaches in their speeches. To fulfil this aim the following questions will be answered:

1. How do the three activists apply apocalyptic narrative explanations in their speeches?

2. How are the different arising themes, both in the manifestos and activists’

speeches talked about and how do they apply apocalyptic narrative explanations?

This will be followed up by a discussion on if a change in policy suggestions (Overton window of political opportunities) can be observed based on the findings.

To clarify, the first question aims to find out what exactly we will be comparing the use of apocalyptic narrative explanations in the manifestos to, while the second question will help to present the results of the thematic analysis systematically, and thereby to find all the

similarities and differences between the movement and the two manifestos.

3. Previous research

Previous studies on speeches and texts about environmental issues by different actors have been highlighted by a number of researchers in different scientific disciplines, such as

sociology, linguistics, and discursive/rhetorical social psychology (e.g. Macnaghten and Urry, 1998; Aiello and Bonaiuto, 2003; and Harré, Brockmeier, & Mühlhäusler, 1999). Their research has so far mainly focused on how climate change issues are produced and

reproduced within public discourse, focusing in particular on social and public media (e.g.

(7)

Bell, 1994; Henderson-Sellers, 1998; Mormont & Dasnoy, 1995; Wilkins, 1995; Wilson, 1993; Zehr, 2000; Carvalho, 2007). In depth analyses have, for example, been conducted in areas such as the constructions of uncertainty, scientific controversy and climate scepticism within society through media representation of climate change issues (Antilla, 2005).

Looking at the broader field of environmental communication, previous research has mainly been focusing on environmental movements’ influence on policy making. In line with the bigger social movement research field, the literature has incorporated information on a variety of important factors for social movements to influence policy changes such as social movement organizations, movement activities, public opinion and elements of the political opportunity structure, as well as exploring the ways in which these factors interact and combine to affect policy change. Those studies give among others, valuable insights into the possibilities and limits of varying communication and participation paths of citizen

involvement in environmental issues. (e.g. Johnsson, Agnone and John, 2010, Olzak and Soule, 2009, Hicks, 2007 and Agnone, 2007; Depoe, Delicath, & Elsenbeer, 2004; Norton, 2007).

An aspect, which so far has not been common to include is the impact of environmental movements’ way of talking about climate change, more specifically their choice of issues on the agenda and suggested solutions for the problems. There are studies focusing on the rhetoric of politicians (e.g. Kurz and Augoustinos, 2010) but a clear lack of studies

combining the effect of influential speeches and texts about environmental issues by social movements and the way climate change is conveyed and discussed in the political sphere.

Consequently, there is a need for further research on the rhetoric of social climate change movements (which have environmental issues as their fundamental concern) specifically in connection to the rhetoric of the political sphere (which to a large extent are the movements’

target groups to influence).

4. Why is it important to fill this research gap?

As clarified above, social scientists agree on the fact that the constructions of texts and speeches can be crucial for actors´ perception of a specific issue, such as climate change. It is

(8)

also agreed that environmental movements can have an impact on the political sphere in form of policy changes, which ultimately means the movements accomplish parts (or all) of their goals, namely to achieve some sort of social change. However, there might be minor but crucial steps along the way. As mentioned above, the literature has identifiedsocial

movement organizations, movement activities and changing public opinion as such. However one path of influence, namely influencing political parties’ ways of talking about climate change issues can be just as important. Even if this influence may not immediately be realised by societies, the movement itself and the electorate, it still represents a gain in influence by the social movement in the political sphere.

As an illustration, highly positioned politicians might sympathize with the opinions and statements of environmental movements without actually being in a position to create an immediate policy changes in the movements favour. Nevertheless, they can affect the way their own party handles and conveys climate issues to its electorate and thereby potentially gaining the movement supporters as their party voters. If the environmental movement is talking about climate change issues in a more radical way - which one could argue Greta Thunberg’s movement is an example for - doors for new kinds of policy suggestions and ways to talk about the climate change might open up, because the politicians realise that the attitudes and opinions of the citizens allow for more radical policy suggestions. Thus, the environmental movement will not have affected the creation of new policies directly, since their language itself does not create policy proposals. Nonetheless an effect will occur

indirectly by opening new doors for more radical policy suggestions for policy-makers. In the words of english professor Lynda Walsh (2015, p. 361):

“To those who have studied and practiced it for 2500 years and counting, rhetoric is the art of communicating in order to build and maintain just polities. It thus forms a bridge between

the ideals of philosophy and the realities of politics.”

(9)

5. The Overton Window Theory

The Overton window theory was developed by John Overton in the mid 1990’s, at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a think tank in Michigan, and aims to understand how societal ideas change over time and influence politics. (Mackintac Center. 2006)

The root of the theory is the concept of only a small range of political policies being available for politicians at any time, since the ideas and thoughts of their constituents is limiting what is possible for them to achieve and the legislation they can suggest, promote or support without losing any political success. The term Overton window refers thus to the window in which these few policy possibilities lie, or in other words, in which acceptable political discourse takes place for the general public. Even if it is not unimaginable that politicians might take political actions outside this window, the suggested policies will undoubtedly be unsuccessful, according to the theory. (Mackintac Center. 2006)

Since the Overton window is based on the dominating ideas, attitudes and presumptions of the electorate, the window will inevitably shift over time. Meaning, policies previously impossible to get through because they were lying outside the window, can over a few years time become part of popular political opinions. Likewise can past popular political policies become infeasible with the ideas and attitudes of current times. (Mackintac Center. 2006)

One example for such an occurrence is the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2015 in the USA. According to the world value survey (see table 1 below) the opinion on whether homosexuality is justifiable or not in the USA has drastically shifted towards more acceptance of homosexuality in society. Both, the percentage of those considering

homosexuality to always be justifiable has increased by 20 percent and the number of those considering homosexuality to never be justifiable has decreased with 39 percent, from the year 1981 to 2014. (OECD. 2019) This led to a shift in the debate surrounding homosexuality from whether or not homosexuality should generally be accepted in society towards whether or not same-sex marriage should be legalized. (OECD. 2019) The latter topic was not on the political agenda before the early 2000’s, because a change in ideas and attitudes had to take place, before politicians could suggest such a policy.

(10)

Tabell 1: Shift in opinion on whether or not homosexuality is justifiable, according to the world value survey from 2014 (Surveys V197 - V204)

What the windows of political opportunities contain, depends among other factors on the country and sometimes even different areas; for example are the attitudes of the south of the USA generally more conservative than those of the north of the USA. Whilst politicians of the north might be ready to implement policies for legalizing adoption for homosexuals who wish to become parents, the politicians of the south might not be for another ten years because of the dominating ideas and attitudes in these places. Likewise, a politician who suggested policies for putting homosexuals in mental institutions in Sweden today would expectedly be unsuccessful and potentially even end his political career, whilst such policies would have been lying within the window of political opportunities in e.g. the 1950’s.

6. Apocalyptic Narrative Explanations

For the following analysis two big works will be used to understand the concept of apocalyptic narrative explanations. Firstly, the foundational works of Killingsworth and Palmer from 1992 and 1996, which is assessing the prevalence and significance of apocalyptic narratives in environmental movements. Secondly, Spoel MA et al.’s work

“Public Communication of Climate Change Science: Engaging Citizens Through Apocalyptic Narrative Explanation” from 2008, which analyses the ways a widely spread climate change

(11)

documentary and a multimedia object theater applied apocalyptic narrative explanation to get citizens to engage in climate change actions.

In both works the researchers examine environmental activists’ use of apocalyptic narrative explanations as a rhetorically effective way to foster public understanding of and public engagement in climate change issues. According to Killingsworth and Palmer, this is possible because the core of the concept is, “[...]to transform the consciousness that a problem exists into acceptance of action toward a solution by prefacing the solution with a future scenario of what could happen if action is not taken, if the problem goes untreated.” (1996. P. 22) In other words, to adopt apocalyptic narrative explanations is to bring forward evidence that proves the occurrence of climate change, which in activists’ cases often is based on

contemporary science, to subsequently present future scenarios built on this evidence with the aim of persuading audiences to take actions to prevent such scenarios from happening.

Killingsworth and Palmer (1992. P. 67/68) argue that using this rhetorical tool can mean

“great power”, nevertheless actors adopting it should consider the risks in claiming “[...] to base their conclusions in factual information. Facts do not exist in the future, only

probabilities and projections. That is why, as Aristotle knew, deliberative discourse - that which debates the course of future action - always involves rhetorical appeals and can never be strictly descriptive and objective.”

The concept of apocalyptic narrative explanation is not a recently developed tool but has been applied for centuries. Although, in the case of environmental movements, the use has been most common in situations where the movement intends to gain more support and

engagement from new groups. (Killingsworth and Palmer, p. 22)

An analytical factor that Spoel et al. (2008, p. 55) emphasise is that differences in political situations can explain deviations in general emphases and tone in apocalyptic narrative explanations. In their own cases the documentary applied “[...] a generally serious and at times earnestly moralizing tone to communicate the message that [...] climate change is scientifically proven phenomenon. [The multimedia object theatre] by contrast focuses less on making the case that climate change exists and more on defining what the phenomenon of climate change is.” Meaning when analysing different actors - in the following study the

(12)

swedish Green Party and the three environmental activists Greta Thunberg, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez and Luisa Neubauer - potential differences in emphases and tone could potentially be explained by the actors’ contrasting political roles and situations. Therefore, a consideration of the contexts of both actors is preferably to be done in the analysis.

7. Material and method

The material basis consists of the green Party’s EU-election manifestos of the years 2014 and 2019, which will be compared and contrasted to one another. Since not all of the manifestos’

content deals with climate change issues, the components talking about climate change will be selected, which is roughly about half of the documents.Finally, to actually be able to see potential adjustments to Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez, Greta and her climate change

movement and to fulfil the aim of the thesis, Greta’s famous speech held in the EU

parliament in early 2019, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez’ speech 2015 in the United Nations General Assembly as well as Luisa Neubauer’s speech in the general meeting of the RWE AG (Rheinisch-Westfälisches Elektrizitätswerk AG) will also be analyzed and compared to the findings of the manifestos.

To conduct the study, a qualitative method for analyzing texts and speeches will be applied.

In this case, thematic analysis prevailed over discourse analysis, since the main purpose of the study will not be to examine how the language in the material itself can be interpreted within the bigger social context of the actors delivering and receiving the texts and the speech, but rather to explore and compare different patterns and themes regarding climate change within the green Party’s election manifestos, and potential changes and adjustments after the breakthrough of Greta Thunberg.

Since thematic analysis explores different themes emerging from texts or speeches, it will help to examine how discourse occurs within the context of environmental communication.

By comparing the emerging themes, possible changes, differences and similarities in the activists and manifestos’ themes can be identified. Thereby, it is possible to identify if the activists themes and rhetoric in their speeches has changed or affected how the Green Party communicates the climate change issue to the general public.

(13)

To conduct the data analysis, Braun and Clarke’s step-by-step guide on thematic analysis (2006, p. 87) seen in the box beneath, will be applied, since it is the first, and so far most widely spread, structured approach to apply when conducting a thematic analysis.

Braun and Clarke’s six step guide for TA:

1. Familiarize yourself with your data 2. Generate initial codes

3. Search for themes 4. Review themes

5. Define and name themes 6. Produce the report

As seen above, the first step is to familiarize with the material by reading and re-reading the manifestos as well as the speeches. During this process initial thoughts and ideas on patterns and themes will be noted in a separate document. Step two will consist of generating the initial codes by giving the interesting features of each line, in each document, a code.

Thereafter the original material will be ignored and the focus shifts onto the codes, which will be reviewed one more time, looking for similar ones to combine under the same, sometimes more latent, term. Finally, the results will be reported under the headline “Results” on page 18. (Braun and Clarke, 2006, p. 84)

8. Delimitations and choice of cases

One of the study’s limitations, which has to be paid attention to, is that just as much as these activists can influence the Green Party’s choice of themes on the climate change, the Green Party or any other political parties could potentially influence what the activists decide to focus on in their speeches, meaning a mutual effect on one another cannot be excluded.

Nevertheless, by choosing to also analyse the party’s manifesto of 2014, and by being able to recognize adjustment within themes to the speeches later on, we will or will not be able to

(14)

observe a shift in the Overton window when it comes to climate change issues towards a more radical and activistic climate change rhetoric.

Keeping this in mind, to be able to identify a potential link between the climate change movement and its’ influence on swedish politics, a clear demarcation for what the term social movement refers to has to be clarified. For this, Andrew Jamison’s (2010. P. 812)

well-developed definition, will be adopted in this thesis. Accordingly, a social movement is

“a form of collective social behaviour that is explicitly organized for political action.” In other words, it is a non-governmental group of individuals with the same set of values or believes (collective identity) trying to achieve political change for example by manifesting themselves through publicly recognized forms of protest or direct action. This is done by coordinating or organizing with help of a common platform. In the case of the climate change movement, a shared believe is the existence of climate change and the need to act before it is too late for the planet. Varieties do exist in what members think the solutions are for stopping or slowing down climate change as well as what exactly the consequences will look like and how fast humans must act.

Ergo, Greta Thunberg and Luisa Neubauer were chosen as potential influencers because of their fast rising fame within the climate change movement, not least as a result of their, by sceptics sometimes described as panic inducing (e.g. Medium Gen. 2019), speeches in front of national as well as international politicians. Naturally, Luisa Neubauer and Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez (mentioned beneath) are not as commonly known by the swedish masses as Greta Thunberg, having to make a decision on who should represent the whole of the climate change movement however, a consideration of how well-known the activists are

internationally and how well their speeches represent the rhetorics of the movement as a whole had to be made.

Among Greta’s most known speeches are the two speeches in front of United Nation assemblies, a speech in front of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), a speech in front of the british parliament as well as her speech in Stockholm in April of 2019.

These have led to media headlines all over the world, often because of some catch phrases she decided to work with during the speeches. (Fridaysforfuture. 2019) Additionally, she was

(15)

awarded two different awards for being, according to the news media “Times”, one of the most influential people of 2019. (Time. 2019) Consequently, it would be difficult for a swedish political party, who has climate change at the heart of their political agenda, to not bear Greta Thunberg in mind when communicating the topic to their voters, considering her success within the movement and influence on the topic.

Luisa Neubauer, as mentioned above, was chosen for the study based on her position within the Fridays for Future movement. She is foremost known as an activist front figure in german-speaking countries but has held well-known speeches about climate change internationally, such as her TED talk in 2019. (TED. 2019) Unlike, Greta Thunberg, Luisa Neubauer is an official member of the german Green Party, for whom she has held a speech in 2019, although not being active in the party’s political work and often criticizing their lack of commitment to climate. (Fink. 2020) Until the European elections in 2019, the speech which earned her the most media attention was in the general assembly of the german energy supply company RWE AG, which is the reason this particular speech was chosen for the following analysis.

Lastly, american-mexican climate activist Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez was selected since he was the internationally most recognized climate activist some years before the Fridays for Future movement emerged. For the analysis his appearance with the most media recognition was chosen, which until the european election in 2015 was his speech in front of the United Nations about the climate change issue. He is not directly involved in the Fridays for Future movement, but has on multiple occasions expressed his support for its members.

(Earthguardians. 2019)

9. Results

9.1 How do the three activists apply apocalyptic narrative explanations in their speeches?

To be able to know what exactly we are looking for in the manifestos and what we will be comparing the use of apocalyptic narrative explanations in the manifestos to, the way in which the activists use apocalyptic narrative explanations in their speeches must first be

(16)

identified. As explained in the theory section, in apocalyptic narrative explanations different rhetorical steps are commonly used. Firstly, the speaker often brings forward evidence proving the existence of climate change, not uncommonly based on current science findings, to then draw the audience a future worst-case scenario to persuade them to take actions against such scenario becoming a reality.

As mentioned before, apocalyptic narrative analysis among climate change activists was, during the last century, used frequently when the movement intended to gain more support and engagement from new groups. (Killingsworth and Palmer. p. 22) Newer, more general studies on the application of apocalyptic narrative explanations are so far not available, therefore more precise numbers on how common it is for members of the climate change movements to make use of this rhetorical tool do not exist. In this thesis, however, I argue that all three of the analysed activists’ speeches include apocalyptic narrative explanations extensively.

Starting with Greta Thunberg, she adopted these apocalyptic explanations throughout her speech in front of the European Parliament in 2019. Unique for this speech is that she formed the apocalyptic scenario with the help of a metaphor, in which she compared the planet to a burning house in need of saving. Greta Thunberg returned to this comparison all throughout the speech, drawing parallels to recent happenings but also using the metaphor to legitimize the alternative, namely solutions for saving the planet from burning down. One example is her using the metaphor to legitimize her suggestion for actions, stating: ”If our house was falling apart, you wouldn't say that you have the situation under control and place the future living conditions for all species in the hands of inventions that are yet to be invented. And you would not spend all your time as a politician arguing about taxes or Brexit. If the walls of our house truly came tumbling down, surely you would set your differences aside and start

cooperating. Well, our house is falling apart, and we are rapidly running out of time. And yet, basically nothing is happening.” Thus, apocalyptic narrative explanation can be identified all throughout Greta Thunberg’s speech, with the addition, that she mainly

resembles the recent climate situation and her future scenario (in which the planet has burned down) to a burned down house.

(17)

Looking at the rhetorical steps she used to apply apocalyptic narrative, they are almost identically to Killingsworth and Palmer’s model (1996), including using contemporary science as basis for the future scenario. The best example for this is where the metaphor is left out, specifically her argument for the end of our civilization, where Greta Thunberg starts off by explaining the future as follows: “Around the year 2030, 10 years 259 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction that will most likely lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” Subsequently, Greta Thunberg gives the audiences an alternative to this scenario, but one for which each of the audience members must actively work for by reducing emissions: “That is, unless in that time, permanent and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society have taken place, including a reduction of our CO2 emissions by at least 50%. And please note that these calculations are depending on inventions that have not yet been invented at scale, inventions that are supposed to clear our atmosphere of astronomical amounts of carbon dioxide. […]”

Finally, both evidence for the collapse of our society if no actions are taken as well as the solutions, which provide the alternative, are backed up by contemporary science: “These projections are backed up by scientific facts, concluded by all nations through the IPCC.

Nearly every major national scientific body around the world unreservedly supports the work and findings of the IPCC.”

Similarly, Luisa Neubauer (2019) adopts apocalyptic narrative explanations by basing them on scientific findings and forming the future scenario according to last years’ happenings.

She began by listing big catastrophes which hit the planet over the past years due to climate change and, like Greta Thunberg, she supported these statements by mentioning scientific findings, although without specific sources: “We are growing up in a world, in which climate chaos becomes a normality. In which refugee catastrophes, supply shortages and extinction of species will dominate our lives. In which a self-determined life, our future, is

overshadowed by the collapse of the ecosystems around us. That is what science predicts and what already is happening. The fear of the next german summer drought, the consequences for agriculture, industry and weakened people draw us a primary picture.” ³Luisa Neubauer

3 Original quote: “Aber wir werden in einer Welt erwachsen, in der Klimachaos zur Normalität wird. In der Flüchtlingskatastrophen, Versorgungsengpässe und Artensterben unser Leben dominieren werden. In der ein selbstbestimmtes Leben, unsere Zukunft, überschattet wird vom Zusammenbruch der Ökosysteme um uns herum.

Das ist was die Wissenschaft prognostiziert und schon jetzt im Gange ist. Die Angst vor dem nächsten deutschen

(18)

does not specifically mention what solutions she suggests to reach the alternative scenario.

Presumably because the speech was held to an energy company’s decision-makers, to stop them from making a considerable investment in coal as energy source. Accordingly, her trying to prevent this investment should make clear that she proposes her audience does not go through with their decision.

Unlike, the other two activists, in his four years older speech to the UN, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez (2015) did not follow the model of Killingsworth and Palmer in every aspect. He too argued for the extinction of humans. However, he did not argue for his statements with the help of scientific findings, but rather with the help of his own

experiences, telling the audience: “What a lot of people fail to see or seem to ignore is that climate change isn't an issue that's far off in the future. It isn't slowly affecting the ice caps in the poles or the sea-level rise in our oceans. It's affecting us right here, right now, and will only continue to get worse. In a three-month period, my family and I, we witnessed the greatest wildfires and the worst floods that we've ever seen in Colorado history. Frequency and severity of massive storms and massive floods, massive super storms, are increasing all over the planet because of our lack of action — because of the increase of carbon dioxide emissions, because of the way that we are living.” He then used these experiences to legitimize his future scenario, arguing: “What is at stake right now is no longer just the planet, is no longer the environment but what is at stake right now is the existence of my generation. What is at stake right now, what we are fighting to protect, what is in your hands, what is in our hands today is the survival of this generation and the continuation of the human race. That is what is at stake.” Finally, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez did imply a solution, specifically to take political action, although emphasising that no one can guarantee that it is not happening too late already. “We need you to take action at COP21 before it's too late. […] We look at the world, we see the planet that we will leave to our generation, so don't be afraid to dream big. Because not only is it possible to get off of fossil fuels but it is already happening. Cities and countries around the planet are committing to 100 % renewable energy in the first half of the century. The pope himself called for a shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy. The solutions are here and with them are coming millions of

Dürresommer, den Folgen für die Landwirtschaft, Industrie und geschwächten Menschen malt ein erstes Bild davon.”

(19)

jobs and economic opportunities. Imagine if we took all the money, we are pouring the fossil fuel industry and into the nuclear industry and put that into renewables. Imagine what we could accomplish. Phasing out fossil fuels is a dream that is slowing becoming a reality. And the question is: Will it happen fast enough to avoid further climate catastrophe?” Thus, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez gave an already existing alternative to the future scenario namely, to switch to renewable energy, which he stressed, must be implemented fast enough through international politics.

These examples show that all of the activists applied apocalyptic narrative explanations in their speeches to influence their audiences. If it has become more common than during the time Killingsworth and Palmer (1996) did their analysis cannot be said based on this. What can be argued for, however, is that the use of this rhetorical tool is widespread among climate activists nowadays.

9.2 Thematic analysis

The thematic analysis in the documents resulted in altogether five common, thoroughly developed themes, which will be discussed individually below. Each theme is introduced with a short summary of the most important findings to thereafter being discussed based on how the respective document tries to convey the theme - in particular if there are applications of apocalyptic narrative explanations -, how the adoption of the theme compares to those of the other documents and, in the case of the manifestos, if there are notable changes in policy suggestions following changes in the themes from 2014 to 2019.

Moreover, since the two manifestos are written in swedish and the activist Luisa Neubauer spoke german when holding her speech, all quotations had to be translated into english by the author of this thesis. Accordingly, all original quotations were added as footnotes beneath.

9.2.1 Taking collective/political vs individual responsibility

The first theme found in the documents concerned responsibility and accountability for both the causes of climate change as well as finding solutions and implementing them in time. In this theme as well as the next theme the same quotation of a future scenario from the 2014

(20)

manifesto is examined. It is the only scenario in the earlier manifesto where something similar to apocalyptic narrative explanation could be observed. Nonetheless, regarding this theme, which actors are pointed out as responsible and to what extent, moved closer to the activists’ expressed views in the manifesto of 2019.

In the election manifesto of 2014, responsibility is described in two ways. On one hand responsibility is illustrated as something the political parties themselves are supposed to take and that the Green Party is seen as one of the few doing so. This view is for example

expressed in statements such as: “When conservative parties choose the interests of large cooperationists above the future of our children, more green politicians are needed.” ⁴(2014.

P. 2) This can be viewed as a way of declaring that the other parties are focusing more on capitalism and big corporations than on more urgent climate change issues, which is why people should vote for the Green Party, a party focusing on the essential climate problems instead. One can also read into the statement, that the party sees the anti-capitalistic route as the right one to limit the impacts of climate change.

Moreover, this quotation is followed up by a description of a desirable future scenario, which together with the previous quotation indirectly is claiming that such a future is only possible if the Green Party gets enough voters, considering they are the only party taking

responsibility for climate change: “For us, the greens, is our responsibility, for our children’s and grandchildren’s possibility to breath fresh air, drink and bath in clean water and grow up without dangerous chemicals in their bodies, a central driving force.” Even though the ⁵ scenario is giving the positive alternative instead of the pessimistic future events which might happen if no actions are taken, the illustration still fulfils some aspects of Killingsworth and Palmer’s model for apocalyptic narrative explanations due to the scenario essentially being presented with the aim to persuade the audience to accept or talk into actions - in this case voting for the Green Party - to reach the desired future.

4 Original quote: “När konservativa partier väljer storföretagens intresse framför barnens framtid behövs fler gröna politiker.”

5 Original quote: “För oss gröna är vårt ansvar för våra barn och barnbarns möjligheter att andas ren luft,

(21)

On the other hand, climate change is in this manifesto described as global issue. Therefore, responsibility to solve it and prevent worse is laid upon the supranational level. In Sweden’s case, the EU is seen as the international representative and consequently accountable for putting together a global climate agreement. This is for example expressed on page four in the statement: ”We want for the EU to take the primary responsibility to bring about a global climate agreement”, meaning, the Green Party of 2014 deemed responsibility and ⁶

accountability for climate change measures to be primarily carried by political entities.

Even though the EU and parties having to take responsibility for global climate and environmental politics is also expressed in the manifesto of 2019, responsibility is here predominantly talked about as a duty every individual must perform, for example by participating in the elections, regardless if they are a Green Party voter or not. A quote exemplifying this is: “We, who share this planet now, decide the future. We cannot blame anyone else.” (2019. P. 3) This view is not expressed in the earlier manifesto and moves ⁷ closer to how the three activists view responsibility for climate change actions as shown in the next section. This quotation also represents an application of apocalyptic narrative explanation in the newer manifesto, since it is followed up by the following statement: “Our children will ask us what we did when we realised the extent of climate threats and

environmental destruction. The Green Party is partaking in the election because we want to be able to answer that we did what was required and that we changed history together. That we met the threats and built a better world for both people and the environment.” (2019. P. ⁸ 3) Once again, instead of presenting the negative outcome for not taking responsibility, the party tries to convince the readers into taking action and voting for them by giving an alternative future scenario where their children are proud of them for what they achieved.

Along the same lines Greta Thunberg argued in her speech: “What we are doing now can soon no longer be undone. In this election you vote for the future living conditions of

humankind”, as well as “The bigger your platform, the bigger your responsibility. The bigger

6 Original quote: “Vi vill att EU ska ta ett huvudansvar för att få till stånd en global klimatöverenskommelse.”

7 Original quote: “Vi som delar den här planeten nu avgör framtiden. Vi kan inte skylla på någon annan.”

8 Original quote: “Våra barn kommer att fråga oss vad vi gjorde när vi insåg vidden av klimathot och miljöförstöring. Miljöpartiet de gröna går till val för att vi vill kunna svara att vi gjorde det som krävdes och tillsammans förändrade historien. Att vi mötte hoten och byggde en bättre värld för både människor och miljö.”

(22)

your carbon footprint the bigger your moral duty” (Greta Thunberg. 2019) Thereby clearly emphasising, that even though politicians and higher ups have a big responsibility to act in favour of climate change actions, nobody is excluded from having some responsibility. Since this statement is part of her burning house metaphor it is included in an apocalyptic narrative explanation.

Likewise, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez argued:“[…] what I learned from my cultural heritage is that this life is a gift and it is our responsibility to respect and protect what gives us life.

So, I began to look at the world around me and began to learn about the issues that we are facing. I saw that we were facing a crisis that was beginning to affect every living system on our planet. I saw that climate change was going to be the defining issue of our time.”

(Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez. 2015) Thereby, not as sharply as Greta Thunberg, Xiuhtezcatl indicates that every living being has the responsibility to nurture nature and consequently to act against climate change.

Furthermore, in the manifesto of 2019, more attention is called to a need for change of companies’ unaccountability concerning environmental work and pollution. The manifesto states among others: “The choices of the consumers are important, but it is not reasonable that the responsibility for climate and environmental work is solely put on the citizens in their role as consumers.” (2019. P. 14) Which introduces policy suggestions such as the one ⁹ expressed on page 25: “There shall be internationally binding regulations for the

responsibility of companies when it comes to the environment and trade union rights.

Companies shall be held accountable for all crimes against these regulations.” The party is ¹⁰ thereby expressing that even though every person is accountable for the development of climate change, companies are big drivers of the issue who should take some, if not more of the responsibility for taking climate actions.

In this aspect, once more, the manifesto of 2019 is moving closer to the views of the climate activists than the manifesto of 2014. Again, Greta Thunberg’s earlier quote can be given as

9 Original quote: “Konsumenters val är viktiga men det är inte rimligt att ansvaret för klimat- och miljöarbetet läggs i knät på medborgarna i sin roll som konsumenter.”

10 Original quote:”Det ska finnas ett internationellt bindande regelverk för företags ansvar vad gäller miljö samt

(23)

an example: “The bigger your platform, the bigger your responsibility. The bigger your carbon footprint the bigger your moral duty. Since companies naturally have a bigger ecological footprint, they also carry more of the responsibility. This is also emphasised by Lisa Neubauer all throughout her speech, for instance by stating: “And all of you in this room (Audience: RWE AG), who carry more of the responsibility than all of the people going to the streets every Friday, you will not one day be able to say that you did not know. Or that you did not see it coming. Or that you thought other people are already taking care of it. Do something with the help of that responsibility.” ¹¹However, something worth noting was that Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez, who held his ten-minute-long speech before the Fridays for Future movement arose, does not mention companies as particularly accountable actors in climate change, but simply emphasises that we everyone has to act.

9.2.2 Thinking about the next generation

The second theme the speeches and the manifestos have in common is the concern about the upcoming generations; a theme with great potential for the use of apocalyptic narrative explanations as shown beneath. Two of the previous quotations (parts of apocalyptic narrative explanations) will be recurring from earlier since they fit into both themes and illustrate well how the party talks about the next generation. An adaptation to the activists’

speeches could be noted regarding the emphasis on the next generation questioning our current actions.

When underlining an argument with the climate consequences in connection to the next generation in the manifesto of 2014, the Green Party puts a clear emotional aspect into its statements by referring to the worst-case scenario. A quotation expressing this position is the statement mentioned in the previous theme: “For us, the greens, is our responsibility, for our children’s and grandchildren’s possibility to breath fresh air, drink and bath in clean water and grow up without dangerous chemicals in their bodies, a central driving force.” (2014. ¹²

11 Original quote: “Und Sie hier alle im Raum, die mehr Verantwortung tragen als all die, die jeden Freitag auf die Straße gehen, Sie werden eines Tages nicht sagen können, dass sie es nicht gewusst haben. Oder, dass Sie es nicht haben kommen sehen. Oder, dass sie dachten, es kümmern sich schon andere. Machen Sie etwas aus ihrer Verantwortung.”

12 Original quote: “För oss gröna är vårt ansvar för våra barn och barnbarns möjligheter att andas ren luft, dricka och bada i rent vatten och växa upp utan farliga kemikalier i kroppen en central drivkraft.“

(24)

P. 2) Important to notice regarding this part out of this apocalyptic narrative explanation, once again, is that it aims to evoke personal feelings by being relatable to the audience.

Moreover, the statement leads readers to consider how life might turn out to be after this generation has left without implementing measurements for climate issues, whereby it might convince to vote for the Green Party.

The manifesto of 2019, on the other hand, adds the dimension that the upcoming generation will be the people holding this generation accountable for its inactions against climate change. More specifically, it considers that generation to be the ones putting the blame on their parents by questioning their current decisions. This is once more examplyfied with an earlier quote, were the party argues: “Our children and grandchildren will ask us which way we chose”, as well as “Our children will ask us what we did when we realised the climate threat and environmental destruction.” (P. 3) Additionally, the party still holds onto its ¹³ emotional emphasis of harming our children by not working for better living conditions:

“Dirty air is a serious health hazard. Children today live and play among dangerous air particles that can make them seriously ill. Exhausts and tire particles lead to lung cancer, heart attacks and strokes and cause more than 3,000 people to die prematurely each year in Sweden alone. This is ten times more than the amount of people dying in traffic accidents.” ¹⁴ (2019. P. 6) This scenario is, in comparison to the one in the manifesto of 2014, written in the presence instead of the future, either because the party changed its stance and does consider air pollution to be an immediate problem rather than an issue with symptoms showing itself in the future or because the party changed its rhetorical technique. By presenting current numbers to the audience instead of a speculative future scenario, the Green Party possible hopes to gain more trust while still evoking emotions as well as showing how urgent solving climate change actually is. Whatever the actual reason can only be speculated on, however, it can be stated that the way the party talked about this issue in the latter manifesto does not have an evident conformity to the way the activists talk about the upcoming generations.

13 Original quotes: “Våra barn och barnbarn kommer att fråga oss vilken väg vi valde. And Våra barn kommer att fråga oss vad vi gjorde när vi insåg klimathot och miljöförstöring.”

14 Original quote: “Smutsig luft är en allvarlig hälsorisk. Barn lever och leker i dag bland farliga luftpartiklar som kan göra dem allvarligt sjuka. Avgaser och däckpartiklar leder till lungcancer, hjärtinfarkter och stroke och gör att fler än 3 000 människor dör i förtid varje år bara i Sverige. Det är tio gånger fler jämfört med hur

(25)

Luisa Neubauer, Greta Thunberg and Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez address this particular theme with the distinction that these activists, because of their young age, count themselves as part of the generation questioning their parents. Greta Thunberg for example stated: “You need to listen to us, we who cannot vote. You need to vote for us, for your children and grandchildren. What we are doing now can soon no longer be undone. In this election, you vote for the future living conditions of humankind.” and “But you cannot ignore [...] the millions of school-striking children who are school-striking for the right to a future.” As well as “You are not mature enough to tell it like is. Even that burden you leave to us children.”

(Greta Thunberg. 2019) These quotations show, that Greta Thunberg still highlights climate change as a problem, which will be at its peak after some years instead of now and is therefore more in line with the manifesto of 2014. Unlike, Luisa Neubauer and Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez, Greta Thunberg does, in the analysed speech, not mention the impact today’s political handling of climate change potentially will have on children’s prospective opinion of this generation.

Luisa Neubauer, on the other hand, argued: “I started with the climate strikes in Berlin, because I asked myself if I am doing everything in my power to put an end to the climate madness. I wonder how you are going to answer that question for yourselves, your children and grandchildren.” (Luisa Neubauer. 2019) This can be interpreted as a way of getting ¹⁵ another generation to act by implying a future scenario in which their own children and grandchildren will be questioning them on their current decisions, which is similar to the statement (P. 3) in the Green Party’s manifesto of 2019.

Likewise, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez (2015) emphasised the importance of the future generations’ impression of today’s generation and actions by arguing: “Every generation leaves a mark on this planet, we leave something behind to be remembered by and we are at a tipping point right now, where we will either be remembered as the generation that

destroyed the planet, that put profits before future or as a generation that united to address the greatest issue of our time by changing our relationship with earth.” Unlike Luisa

Neubauer and both manifestos, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez made his statement less personal

15 Original quote: “Ich habe mit den Klimastreiks in Berlin angefangen, weil ich mich gefragt habe, ob ich alles in meiner Macht stehende tue, um dem Klimawahnsinn ein Ende zu setzten. Ich frage mich, wie sie diese Frage vor sich, ihren Kindern und Enkeln beantworten.”

(26)

to the individual listener by not mentioning their own children in particular, but still announced that there is a single alternative to the undesired outcome. Without bringing forward evidence to prove that what he suggested as measures against climate change (as later discussed mainly a switch to 100 percent renewable energy), he still provides future scenarios where one alternative is more attractive than the other, with the aim to get the audience to accept his proposed measures. Therefore, this can be regarded as partly fulfilling the requirements of Killingsworth and Palmer’s apocalyptic narrative explanations.

Finally, in contrast to the manifestos, two of the activists emphasised how the young

generation is leading what Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez describes as “the fight against climate change”. Luisa Neubauer (2019) stated: “Today on the streets of Essen, the people are

screaming: We are here, we are loud, because you are stealing our future. By that we do not mean, that us young people will simply drop dead one day, because Germany did not leave coal fuel in time. But we are growing up in a world where climate chaos is becoming a normality.” Akin to the description of Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez (2015): “We are flooding the streets and we are now flooding the courts to show the world that there is a movement on the rise and that our generation is at the front of that movements fighting for the solutions that we need.” A potential reason for the Green Party to not include similar statements in ¹⁶ the manifestos could be to not lock the doors for other generations as their voters. By not arguing that fighting for climate change action is a “trend” lead and dominated by young people, the manifesto avoids discomforting individuals with strong connections to specific groups, for instance older generations. Additionally, it avoids making the climate change topic a concern of a group and keeps the issue relevant for everyone.

9.2.3 Emphasising the acuteness of climate change

A naturally recurring theme in the analysed material was the acuteness of the climate situation we are in now and, as the analysis beneath will show, this theme too had great potential for applying apocalyptic narrative explanations, which prominently increased in the later manifesto. Notable in these findings was the resemblance and extremity of the future

16 Original quote: “Auf den Straßen in Essen rufen Menschen heute: “Wir sind hier, wir sind laut, weil ihr unsere Zukunft klaut.”Damit meinen wir nicht, dass wir jungen Menschen von ein auf den anderen Tag tot umfallen werden, weil Deutschland nicht rechtzeitig aus der Kohle aussteigt. Aber wir werden in einer Welt

(27)

scenarios presented by the activists when applying narrative analysis, which nevertheless were not adopted by the Green Party the same way.

In regards to how the activists highlighted the present climate severity in their speeches, two of them put great emphasis on the fact that as soon as in a couple of decades, humankind could be extinct due to the effects of climate change. Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez was in 2015 the first to argue along this line by stating: “What is at stake right now is no longer just the planet, is no longer the environment but what is at stake right now is the existence of my generation. What is at stake right now, what we are fighting to protect, what is in your hands, what is in our hands today is the survival of this generation and the continuation of the human race. That is what is at stake.” This part of an apocalyptic narrative explanation leading to suggesting a global switch to 100 percent renewable energy, was discussed earlier in this document, on page 16.

A similar reasoning was adopted by Greta Thunberg in 2019, when she gave multiple arguments concerning the end of our as well as other kinds. To begin with she stated:

”Around the year 2030, 10 years 259 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction that will most likely lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” Later she elaborated on this by stating: “We are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction, and the extinction rate is up to 10,000 times faster than what is considered normal, with up to 200 species becoming extinct every single day.” Subsequently she used these claims to base her reasoning for a complete change of society on, arguing: “So, why waste precious time arguing about what and who needs to change first? Everyone and everything has to change.” Thereby Greta Thunberg applied a future scenario similar to Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez’s, namely a world without the existence of life to convince the audience to act as fast as possible.

The last of the activists, Lisa Neubauer (2019) did not use apocalyptic narrative explanation when highlighting the acuteness of climate measures in the same traditional way, instead leaving the picture for the listener to figure out. By mentioning negative consequences climate change has already had, although not underpinning it with scientific facts (as Killingsworth and Palmer found in apocalyptic narratives explanations to commonly be applied), people get to imagine the effects climate change might have in an undefined amount

(28)

of time. She framed it as follows: “The fear of the next german summer drought, the

consequences for agriculture, industry and weakened people draw us a primary picture.” ¹⁷ Thereby, she underlines how serious the situation already is as well as the fact that it will only get worse from now on as long as we do not take measures, which formed her argument for closing down coal mines.

Before any of these activists held their speeches, the Green Party’s manifesto of 2014 had been published touching the subject of acuteness to a much lesser extent. In the full document only two arguments are underlined with the effects climate change will have if no actions will be taken. The first policy change argued for based on how urgent climate change is, is to ban the use of dangerous chemicals in agriculture and other productions where the chemicals might end up harming people and nature. For this, the party pointed out what happens without counteractions on page seven: “If we do not take care of our environment several of the services the environment provides for us, such as clean our water and give us fish, game, berries and mushrooms, will worsen.” ¹⁸Likewise, the quote mentioned twice before is valid once again: “For us, the greens, is our responsibility, for our children’s and grandchildren’s possibility to breath fresh air, drink and bath in clean water and grow up without dangerous chemicals in their bodies, a central driving force.” Focusing on the latter half, some of the ¹⁹ consequences the party is trying to prevent are described. Although they are harmful and draw an undesirable picture, the party manifesto does not mention mass extinction of humankind.

Despite the fact that the party still did not mention human mass extinction in the manifesto of 2019, the way was theme is adopted changed. In fact, in this manifesto all themes addressed are introduced by explaining today's situation, within the different areas, by shining light on the negative aspects. For example, writing about “Living nature, oceans and forests” on page eight, the section starts off with: “The earth’s ecosystems are threatened. Rainforests are looted to, among others, make space for big plantations to produce palm-oil and cattle food.

More and more animal and plants are being eradicated. The oceans are being acidificated

17 Original quote: “Die Angst vor dem nächsten deutschen Dürresommer, den Folgen für die Landwirtschaft, Industrie und geschwächten Menschen malt ein erstes Bild davon.”

18 Original quote: ”Om vi inte tar hand om vår miljö kommer flera av de tjänster som miljön gör oss, som att rena vårt vatten och ge oss fisk, frukt, vilt, bär och svamp, att försämras.”

19 Original quote: “För oss gröna är vårt ansvar för våra barn och barnbarns möjligheter att andas ren luft,

(29)

and warmed up in a pace which changes the preconditions for marine life. Almost all coral reefs, which are homes to millions of species are already destroyed or seriously threatened.

Inside stranded whales several kilos of plastics are being found. In many oceans, the overfishing is leading to acutely threatened populations. If we do not act now there will be more plastics in the oceans than fish by the year 2050.” ²⁰In line with apocalyptic narrative explanations, a solution to improve this situation is subsequently offered: “But it is possible to make a difference. We want to protect and preserve our oceans and forests so that generations to come also can live off and enjoy them.” ²¹

Another example for this, specifically related to the effects of climate change, is on page six, were the party argues: “Polluted air is a serious health hazard. Today, children live and play among dangerous air particles, which can cause them serious harm. Exhausts and tire particles lead to lung cancer, heart attacks and strokes, causing more than 3 000 early death every year in Sweden alone. That is ten times more than the amount of deaths in traffic accidents.” This illustration is adopted as the introduction and legitimization for the ²² following policy suggestions: “All car traffic cannot be replaced by public transport and bicycles. The modernisation of the car industry must be sped up so that emissions, from the cars still needed, get as low as possible. The expansion of renewable fuel must increase exponentially and the use of different fuel than fossil has to be stimulated. There also have to be requirements for renewable fuels to not counteract other environmental goals or lead to looting rainforests.” These two examples illustrate, that the party sees the use of ²³

20 Original quote: “Jordens ekosystem är hotade. Regnskog skövlas för att bland annat kunna ge plats till stora plantager för att producera palmolja och djurfoder. Allt fler vilda djur och växter utrotas. Haven försuras och värms upp i en takt som förändrar förutsättningarna för allt marint liv. Nästan alla korallrev, som är hem till miljoner djurarter, är redan förstörda eller allvarligt hotade. I strandade valar hittas flera kilo plast. I många hav leder överfiske till akut hotade bestånd. Om vi inte agerar kommer det att finnas mer plast än fisk i haven år 2050.”

21 Original quote: “Men det går att göra skillnad. Vi vill skydda och bevara våra hav och skogar så att kommande generationer också kan leva och njuta av dem. Apocalyptic narrative explanation.”

22 Original quote: “Smutsig luft är en allvarlig hälsorisk. Barn lever och leker i dag bland farliga luftpartiklar som kan göra dem allvarligt sjuka. Avgaser och däckpartiklar leder till lungcancer, hjärtinfarkter och stroke och gör att fler än 3 000 människor dör i förtid varje år bara i Sverige. Det är tio gånger fler jämfört med hur många som dör i trafikolyckor. BUT Allt bilåkande kan inte ersättas med kollektivtrafik och cykel.”

23 Original quote: “Allt bilåkande kan inte ersättas med kollektivtrafik och cykel. Moderniseringen av bilindustrin måste skyndas på så att utsläppen blir så låga som möjligt från alla bilresor som fortfarande kommer att behövas. Utbyggnaden av förnybara drivmedel måste öka kraftigt och användningen av andra drivmedel än fossila ska stimuleras. Det måste också ställas krav på förnybara drivmedel så att de inte motverkar andra miljömål eller leder till skövling av regnskog.”