Thursday, December 19, 2019

“Xcel’s Fixed Revenue” song lyrics

“Xcel’s Fixed Revenue” by Lee Samelson sung at the Energy We Can't Afford Rally on Sept 10th, 2020

 (Verses in Blue) (Chorus in Red) (Bridge in Black Ink) 

Sung to the Tune of “Electric Avenue” by Eddy Grant 


Working so hard for fair studies,

To prove what’s in the public need,

Legalized monopoly power,

Blocks truth and transparency,


‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, as our monopoly supplier,

We don’t want to pay for Sherco Gas Units for 40 years hereafter!


Working so hard for our planet,

Let’s own that great solar PV,

Legalized monopoly power,

Blocks local-owned clean energy,


‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, as our monopoly supplier,

We don’t want to pay for Sherco Gas Units for 40 years hereafter!


Out on the grid its outdated,

Be wary of stranded assets,

They see us as captive ratepayers,

On the hook to pay off their debt,


‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, and what do they conspire?

We don’t want to build new Fossil Gas Burners and watch our Earth expire!


Who is to blame for the rate hikes?

Unwise investments abound,

We’ve had no say in the process,

Now grassroots leverage wins progress! 


As we comment onto Xcel’s IRP, we’re feeling so inspired,

They set the standard to go carbon-free, and then we’ll take it higher!


The Contact with HERC ---Rip!!  Just down the street--- Rip!!… 


As we comment onto Xcel’s IRP, we’re feeling so inspired,

They set the standard to go carbon-free, and then we’ll take it higher! 

“Xcel’s Fixed Revenue”  version sung at rally Oct 21st, 2019

Working so hard for fair studies,
To prove what we really do need,
Legalized monopoly power,                   
Blocks truth and transparency, 

‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, and what do they conspire? 
We don’t want to pay for Sherco Gas Units for 40 years hereafter 

Working so hard for the planet,  
Let’s own that great solar PV,
Legalized monopoly power,
Blocks local-owned clean energy, 

‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, and what do they conspire? 
We don’t want to pay for Sherco Gas Units for 40 years hereafter 

Out on the grid its outdated, 
Be wary of stranded assets,   
They see us as captive ratepayers,
On the hook to pay off their debt,

‘Cause we’ve been locked in to Xcel’s Fixed Revenue, as our monopoly supplier 
We don’t want to pay for Sherco Gas Units or else our earth expires.  

Who is to blame for the rate hikes,
Unwise investments abound,
We’ve had no say in the process,
Now grassroots leverage wins progress! 

As we speak tonight on Xcel’s IRP, we’re feeling so inspired
They set the standard to go carbon-free, and then we’ll take it higher ! 

38th Street ---Riiip, 38th Street ---Riiip   (Let’s sing it once more!)

As we speak tonight on Xcel’s IRP, we’re feeling so inspired
They set the standard to go carbon-free, and then we’ll take it higher ! 

Friday, September 13, 2019

Press Release for MN Climate Strike

Minnesota Youth Climate Strike
Janani Srinivasa | (612)-800-4673| 
Juwaria Jama | (612)-876-7428 |
Mia DiLorenzo | (612)-817-4673 |

September 20: Youth Activists Strike to Declare a Climate Emergency 

We invite you to join us in this strike to take back what yours, save our homes, and stand up against injustice! 

St. Paul, Minnesota—September X — On Friday, September 20th, hundreds of thousands of young activists across the globe will strike from school to protest the government's failure to reverse the effects of climate change. We demand change, and as the generation set to inherit this world, we strike to regain control of our future and will not settle for any action that fails to recognize the extent of this crisis. 

Political leaders in Minnesota and around the world have failed to prioritize — and in some cases, even acknowledge — climate change. Our very own Governor is no different. Line 3 calls for the building of an oil pipeline through Northern Minnesota, an area filled with diverse wildlife and ecosystems. This pipeline would endanger the Mississippi River headwaters, wild rice waters, forests and wetlands, not to mention the intrusion of Native American reservations. 

According to the United Nations, minority groups and low-income communities are the hardest hit by climate change. In Northern Minnesota, 1 in 10 babies are born with dangerous levels of mercury in their system due to poor conditions of the water filtration system. in Southern Minnesota many babies are found with high amounts of nitrate in their blood, a potentially fatal condition. The communities with the highest risk are often ones with high minority groups and  the communities affected are disproportionately low-income people of color. 

We make the following demands:

  • Safe removal and a halt on construction of Line 3 and similar pipelines
  • Declare the climate crisis to be a local, state, and national emergency — because that’s what it is.
  • Enact powerful legislation to combat climate change on local and state levels in Minnesota.
  • Recognize trash incineration as a harmful form of energy and transition the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center away from using trash to create power.
  • All politicians in Minnesota public offices must refuse campaign funds from the fossil fuel industry.
  • Adopt the Green New Deal and the Minnesota Green New Deal to shift our country and state to 100 percent clean, renewable, and net-zero emission energy sources through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers.
  • Enact legislation and regulations on the lead content in cities around Minnesota and provide safe drinking water for Minnesota families.

Climate strike locations around Minnesota:
Minnesota Youth Climate Strike  
WHERE: Western Sculpture Garden, then a rally to the Capitol
WHO: Youth climate activists, elected officials, influencers, and environmental changemakers. A complete list of speakers will be sent out at a later date.
WHEN: 11:30 AM to 2 PM on Friday, September 20th, 2019

We will continue to share information about actions around Minnesota on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and at


On September 20th, the Minnesota Youth Climate Strike will focus on influencing local elected officials and leaders. We will have elected officials speaking on issues such as climate justice, the power of youth, and ways that young activists can further get involved. We call for the state of Minnesota and the United States of America to adopt the demands and policies of the US Youth Climate Strike in order to protect our future and individual liberties.

Tuesday, September 3, 2019

Getting Turnout to a Gay-themed Climate Comedy Performance

 As someone who organizes climate and energy community education events for my line of work, I was grappling with a very related question in the lead up to my spoken word climate comedy performances I did for the Minnesota Fringe Festival in 2019 (Click here for description). What would it be like for me to promote an ecological-themed show and have almost no one actually come attend? Such and outcome would feed this downright creepy suspicion that this planet might not be saved after all. It would appear as haunting evidence that there simply is not enough interest among the general public on the mass scale needed to address the crisis before it is “too late”. Low attendance would seem to confirm this long-standing Conventional Wisdom that climate is not a "sexy" enough topic to activate and engage more than a select niche audience in this short attention-span & entertainment preoccupied culture.

Such a worst-case scenario is not how things actually played at with the at the MN Fringe Festival and that is not my main reason for bringing up this dark speculation.
The main point is the steps I took to inoculate myself against the lousy outcome that conventional wisdom would suggest. I took upon the challenge of actually finding a way to make this urgent and timely topic of climate both sexy and entertaining.
I granted entertainment value to the issue of climate by putting it into the format of a pun-off competition, placing a series of strategically arranged word puns that fit together like pieces of a complex puzzle.
I worked in the element of love relationships into the performance script because it is a bridge to sexy and as we know from marketing and advertising, sexy is attention- grabbing. 
 But I made this comedy on climate justice sexy by making the theme on love relationships intersectional with LGBTQ acceptance rather than the usual & familiar heteronormativity. This served to add a whole new dimension of depth and originality to the comedy script.  
I created much of the actual humor by drawing out a surprising number of deep and profound parallels between the LGBTQ and Climate movements (Which I have detailed here I supplemented word puns with double entendres where the same set of words yield a double narrative. I often described both climate activism and LGBTQ pride using the same set of words.  

In some of my latter performances, I introduced myself as having an agenda of “radical pun-da-mental-ism!”. It means putting puns alongside “da-mental”.  In ‘other’ words, the series of word puns I offered were not random but had an underlying meaning where you have dig way down to uncover the root. And the word root just happens to be “the root” of the word radical.

To make a more sexual analogy, I go deep in order to stimulate maximum arousal… and have a bit of fun on the side.

 To go back to the beginning, devising a comedy on the Climate Crisis is quite a challenge to pull off in a quality manner. One has to treat such an important topic with the regard that it deserves by offering some depth. I came up with a version of humor that contains enough "Aha!" moments to belie a difficult subject matter rather than an attempt at humor which serves to cheapen the stark implications of what we are facing.   
Before going any further, I have to say I added in the element of dating and love relationships for reasons far beyond rote sex appeal for attention. It serves the additional benefit of having a humanizing effect on a main topic that is usually associated with cold hard impersonal science. Climate disruption in particular has difficult (but not impossible) for many of our brains to process and for us to relate to on a personalized level because it is so long-term and global in its reach reaching.
With this in mind, I arranged Carbon Man-Dating to “impact the reader/ audience on multiple levels of head and heart simultaneously-- a creative balance that is stimulating both mentally and affectionately” (as I had on my show description page) 
Making liberal use of word puns enabled yet another stylistic advantage to the script than mere entertainment value. The fusing of word puns and double entendres enables the benefit of presenting sexual themes & references without the use of directly adult words or images. That way it comes across in a beautiful, funny or ironic manner rather than a vulgar one. The content can straddle the line of being for somewhat mature audiences without being X-rated.  
So, with the above in mind, I genuinely felt like I had a brilliant concept and that all elements were in balance.  
But the personal pride of coming up with a unique and original combination of genres ended up being a bit of a double-edged sword because of this one fundamental question. Where is my ideal audience? 
I worry greatly that my heady focus on climate made me come off as too nerdy and geeky to really catch the attention of the constituency that frequents gay bars and nightclubs, which just happens to be the most visible element of the LBGTQ community. But I know the potential is there. I remember getting hearty responses of laughter I got when I waved my “Love is Carbon Neutral, Let’s C how many O’s the 2 of us can make” sign when marching through the TC Pride Parade.  But on the flip side, actual technical wonks who make their salary by working in the climate-concerned energy field have not been as responsive as I expected to my offerings of doing comedy just because it relates to their line of work. I have gradually built up a growing fan base among the more activist/ organizer types in the climate and energy fields. But the concept of putting climate and energy into an entertainment format does not yet seem to be resonating with the more technocratic grasstops types in the field. Technocratic Grasstops refers to those who get paid decent salaries to not rock the status quo or use their technical expertise to challenge the existing structure or power & ownership, and who I never see show up at the more activisty sort of climate and energy events. But then again, the scope of my outreach was rather limited.   

That worst-case disastrous attendance scenario did not exactly come to pass when I did the Fringe Festival, at least after night 1 of my performance. But if I had not already built up a modest fan base from previous performances that I did at Gandhi Mahal, I would have almost certainly gotten an attendance that would be too poor for my ticket revenue to exceed the costs I paid to be part of the Fringe and for my promotional show cards. Even then, a liner measure of audience size is far from the only consideration that mattered to me. The whole other dimension is the extent to which my content resonated with the audience who do show up. Performing at the Fringe virtually guarantees audience members who were not previously in my social and professional circles, which is where I saw potential. Someone in that category wrote a review on my show page that they did not understand the subject matter I was talking about aside from the fact that I was using a lot of word puns. I knew full well going into the performance that this would be the case with some audience members. I made a strategic call that taking the time during my performances to explain potentially unfamiliar concepts would upend the rhythm and pace of comedy and that it would come at the expense of giving the remaining audience a chance to disengage and not hold attention. But even more so than low attendance I was more haunted and disturbed by how the common lingo in climate activist circles is not universal common knowledge. Low attendance could have multiple explanations besides lack of interest. But not relating to my content appears as haunting evidence that there are adults who were not curious about the alarming topic of climate to be motivated learn about it on their own. I would much like unfamiliarity with the key sociopolitical concepts of climate activism to be more the exception than the norm, because that is how we can defeat the propagandists whose manipulating us with misinformation has delayed climate action.
This brings up a good question on the social value of my performance.
In my performance, I often used the words they or them as a cue for when I am outgrouping and specific set of people as in “they” are not part of “us”.. I alternated between a “Kumbaya sort of we should all get along” emphasis (often signified by when I used the term intersectionality) and a much more divisive approach when I clarified those who do not deserve to be included or trusted as part of the grand “us”. In all cases of my outgrouping, I was referring to hardline climate deniers- Not so much skeptics who want to talk about and debate the issue but those who dismiss any engagement on the topic of climate change right from the pretext.    
There are 3 main motivations as to why the hardline climate deniers deny climate. Some are hardcore partisans for the Republican Party to which admitting that climate is a problem would make their chosen party look bad and irresponsible given that they have climate denial in their platform. Other deniers are more general economic ideologues who act as social engineers for a sweeping agenda of privatization and deregulation which would have to be stopped and reversed to address the climate crisis. And for many others have a line of work whose salary depends upon mass climate action not happening. While the motivations are understandable, being outright dismissive of climate being human caused and serious is quite a nutty thing to do, particularly given the consequences.
Using hardline climate deniers, particularly those who abuse positions of governmental or corporate power make a well-deserved target for an uppercut of sarcasm, irony and ridicule. Making jokes at the expense of these hardline climate deniers is like shooting fish in a barrel.

But these hardline dismissives are no longer close to the majority of the population and whose influence would be sidelined if “we” were to accomplish the much more doable and productive mission of convincing those in the vast middle to join on our side.

Those in the middle do not have an economic ideological, partisan political, or narrow self-interest motive to deny the scientific link between C02 emissions and disruptive climate change, but do have various inner psychological or socio-cultural motivations to not want to take the problem too seriously because it is like real scary.

The comedy I came up with served to gives an exuberant sugar-high to those who already share climate activist views.

The question I am not sure how to answer is how I use comedy to move those who are in the middle. It would have to be a different approach to the same themes.

The Extensive Intersectionality between the LGBTQ and Climate Movements


Queer climate activists bring something unique and special.

Our community has already had to endure societal climates filled with unpredictable and freak disasters, analogous to climate disruption. Those who enforce strict binary roles for expressions, affections and identity strike us and sometimes violently, analogous to climate induced extreme weather disasters.

The climate crisis can be ascribed to an overaccumulation of di-pole molecules in our atmosphere, greenhouse gasses that let solar radiation in but keep it from being reflected into outer space. It is interesting how close the word di-pole sounds to binary. Enforcing the strict binaries can be described as molecules having their dipole moment.

As a result, we (the queer community) has already had to develop resilient and interdependent communities rooted in love and care for each other. It is very parallel to how The “transition town” branch of environmentalists say we must co-create resilient communities to weather the shocks of climate disruption.


Both social movements have been brought into an informal political alliance with each other because they both happen to share common political enemies.

For both movements to unite around something affirmative or to be in active dialogue with each other… It would not just be about right beliefs or belief in rights. It would be about love, the bold, courageous kind of love.

What is the intersectionality between climate and pride? The experience of valuing my genuine self as I naturally am is parallel to genuinely valuing the natural world. 

It means seeing the world in a critical thinking manner rather than justifying a dysfunctional system as it is.

It seeks the transformation of socio=political attitudes with human rights overtones but goes a bit further. Many among the LBGTQ population have had to stand up for our existence just like mitigating climate disaster is asserting ourselves for our right to exist.


Rather than strictly identifying as gay, straight or bi, we are seeing a growing sector of the population resist labels and ascribe their sexuality as more fluid. Meanwhile Global Warming increases the amount of fluidity that our atmosphere can hold. That is an ironic parallel to increased sexual fluidity in our social atmosphere.

At this time both social causes and numerous additional ones are being attacked by the same political enemy. When matters are so stark it is counterproductive to argue about which cause for liberation has a higher priority than the other. It means we have to get intersectional in a “How about we all love each other” sort of way.

         As Naomi Klein says, addressing climate not an inconvenient sacrifice for a distant threat – it is our best hope for a better present. The need to address climate brings before us a grand opportunity for all liberation movements to unite… and to right all multiple past wrongs in one fell swoop. So in this hypothesis, along with climate action comes the tearing down all forms of supremacy that considers whole groups of people to be inherently superior to others, heterosexism being one of them. 

Either way, social movements intersecting and proping each other up, enables us to become powerful enough to knock common enemies onto their back heels. But if activists across many intersections are so needlessly compartmentalized in our own little siloes, we then leave a power vacuum for the mutual opposition to exploit.

Thoughts of having an intersectional movement is compelling in a parallel way to sexual fantasies because joining together enables us to become powerful enough to overthrow our common enemies, and that type of ‘powerful’ is arousing.

But in order to be “intersectionally attractive”, it means maintaining an appearance of no throwaway planet meaning no throwaway people. That would include making a place for guys who perhaps do in fact care but are just too insecure in their gender roles to feel comfortable going green. Zero Waste would also mean Zero wasted people, which could manifest in providing green jobs for the formerly incarcerated.


   Those who shun green products and behaviors also shun gay products and behaviors for the same reasons. Both are rooted in a pressing urge to avoid being seen as feminine. But it is more based in perception than reality. Making choices that harm our common environment does not safeguard gender identity and we have to take the toxic masc off of that illusion (referring to toxic masculinity).

According to orthodox gender norms, expressing care about anything beyond one’s own narrow self-interest (which is what environmentalism is in most cases) is regarded as sentimental, feminine, irrational, subjective. It is taken as every adjective seen as the opposite of manly. But we can redefine masculinity as using intelligence to stand up to authoritarian bullies. Profiteering from plundering the public good should be redefined as a non-consensual relationship rather than as masculine.

Particularly in rural, conservative remote areas people who are either gay or alarmed about climate feel rather isolated and have a hard time finding others who are open about sharing similar traits. There are prevailing parallel social norms where displaying gay affection is risky and where talking about climate change rather than weather is considered a topic inappropriate for polite company or “getting political”. Such isolated individuals live life day after day going by without 1) taking part in an action as part of a larger climate movement or 2) sharing affection with another human being they are attracted to.

Such isolated individuals think their only opportunities to take action on climate are what they can do as individuals…feeling disempowered from much anything else. The other half of this analogy is a closeted or isolated gay individual who only feels empowered for sexual release on an individual level in the realm of fantasy. “Individual action” in both cases is inadequate in the long run for the big picture. Yet both instances help isolated individuals feel just a little better in the moment each day.

Talking with strangers to build up a movement for climate action brings much the same apprehensive feelings as directly stating affectionate interest in someone of the same sex. It risks either a harsh rejection where anti-gay attitudes and climate denialism are interchangeable, or the softer rejection of “thanks but no thanks” or “sorry not interested”. Another scenario would be rejection by someone who actually does have same sex attraction but is not out to themselves or does not want the risk of outing themselves to others. This would be parallel to being rebuffed by someone who does think that climate disruption is real and human caused but has psychological/ sociological motivations to not want to take it that seriously.   

Both gays and environmentalists ridiculed, dismissed or oppressed in very parallel ways. One side of the opposition impugns both as weak, feminine or some reactionary nonsense which bullies take as a sign of vulnerability to exploit. Another side of the opposition demonized both as powerful & power-hungry who have exploitative agendas. And there is the opposition that combines the worst of both sides where the authorities in charge actively persecute people who are gay of who are protecting their environment.

We also have to keep in mind, if an affection-starved gay individual or an action-starved environmentalist were make the first move in reaching out to someone, there is also a chance that the other person will respond very affirmatively.  It is easy to say to not take rejection personally, and the feelings of alienation and insignificance are real which motivates one to retreat. In addition, retreating and doing nothing does not solve the problem in either case.

When winning (fill in the blank)” is seen as too big, daunting and overwhelming, it incites hopelessness and inaction. That blank can be filled with either Climate Justice or Fulfillment in Gay relationships, interchangeably.

Running out of time to save the natural beauty of the world from climate disaster is deeply parallel of fear of becoming too old and unattractive to be considered desirable or attractive by the gay population, another sense of “running out of time”.

Normally, dating life presents many chances to fail and to fail better. But mitigating climate disaster does not allow opportunity for failure. The analogy here is that there is a firm deadline of 12 years from now and counting in order to achieve the promises of climate justice. Otherwise, we would pass the tipping point making a long-term doom scenario inevitable even if the consequences won’t be immediately apocalyptic. This sense of permanent doom is parallel to common perceptions that one’s physical attractiveness will be permanently unrecoverable due to aging in a culture where age is looked down upon with disdain. The analogy is not symmetrical, but there is one deep parallel worth noting.

Taking action to address climate would have been much easier, less drastic and less disruptive had we done so 25 years ago. The actions we have to take now to mitigate climate are a lot more drastic and disruptive now that the curve has gotten a lot steeper. Similarly, in a gay hook-up world where youth is in higher demand, it would have been easier for a 45 year old to make affectionate connections (analogous to implementing climate solutions) if he had the opportunity to do so 25 years previously, though not impossible or a lost cause.   

The age of 40 is often put out as an arbitrary deadline for being in demand in the dating world. A controversial topic indeed but the feelings are real.  


*Some of the common slurs used against the gay population actually happen to be much more accurate descriptions of climate denialists and people who express backlash against environmental values: 1: Having a permissive attitude toward crimes against nature 2: Spreading tolerance of dangerous lifestyle choices 3: Posing a moral danger to our children.

*Many climate denialists accuse global warming of being “a dangerous pseudoscience used to advance an inhumane social agenda”. But what those same words happen to be an actual description of gay conversion therapy.

*Those who insist everyone’s sexual orientation has to be straight (implying that being gay is a choice) happen to be the same people permitting everyone’s scientific orientation on global warming to be a type of “because I said so” circular reasoning, where authority is substituted for actual inquiry. The common phrase ‘get your facts straight’ is rather ironic in this respect.

*While this may only apply to the most reactionary of self-proclaimed Christian fundamentalists like the ones who take the big signs onto street corners, I hear them casting both homosexuality and environmentalism (labelled as earth goddess worship) as part of some sort of pagan idolatry that will supposedly bring about the apocalypse. But it is their unfettered, unregulated, vampiric worship of Neo-Liberal Economic orthodoxy which actually threatens Armageddon.

*Antigay operatives warned that marriage equality would bring upon a Biblical apocalypse or some form of societal collapse… something which the global climate crisis will actually make happen.


Marriage equality has been treated as a foreboding sign of a Biblical apocalypse. Meanwhile marriage between corporations (considered to be ‘people’ according to a legal fiction) will actually more accurately lead to a Biblical apocalypse if they act hostile to the natural world. Marriage between corporate ‘persons’ is known as mergers, so the non-enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust act or on the books anti-monopoly laws is parallel to granting “Merger Equality. The biggest example is the merging of chemical pesticide companies like Monsanto and Dupont. Again, the big irony is that the very same things that homophobes accuse the gay population of actually apply to those in positions of corporate/ political influence who aren’t considerate toward environmental values. The sense of urgency that the heterosexists had against marriage equality is parallel to the urgency of stopping these corporate mergers where anti-environment corporations become too rich and powerful for democracy to restrain.
Speaking of unnatural abominations, judges on many courts are willing to give more rights to artificial corporate persons than they are to flesh and blood natural persons who happen to be LGBTQ.   

The term ‘sincerely held religious belief’ is often invoked as a justification to permit discriminate against LGBTQ population who are non-heteronormative. But there is a way we could flip the script and claim ‘sincerely held religious belief’ against those who act contrary to environmental values. It would be specifically to challenge those who use the “linear dogma” of never ending economic growth to devalue against “our cyclical nature” (in which our natural world is full of cycles). Linear dogma presents economic growth as an unending line which just happens to resemble the word straight.  

Assuming infinite economic growth can thus be described as being linear in ones economic orientation while challenging that assumption can be described as being circular in ones economic orientation.

Those who use religion to condemn the gay population accuse us of being sinful, lustful characters who practice dastardly, obscene and disgusting acts. But those words more accurately describe the acts by those who put a linear economic orientation into practice, such as planned obsolescence.
It basically means chopping down a Northwest Territory’s worth of trees and pairing them with toxic finishes just to manufacture furniture not designed to last, so that customers would have to come back and keep buying more. In that way, planned obsolescence can accurately be described as a “lifestyle choice” that is “an abomination contrary the laws of nature”, basically the same language used to oppress the gay population.

The theology is that God the Creator designed the treasures of our earth be cycled through the web of life again and again, reflected nontheologically in the laws of Thermodynamics. 

When a linear economic orientation is put into practice, it means being an automaton for some iron law of economics that requires things be consumed, burned up, worn out and discarded at an escalating rate… all in the name of growth. It is impossible to have never ending linear growth in a closed loop system. But to publicly state that obvious point is very politically risky and would invite fierce opposition and ridicule. In analogous terms, it can be described as “coming out the closet as circular in one’s economic orientation.

If any of the big names running for President or high office simply declared the succinct truth that you can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet…then they would face an absolute tidal wave of bigotry and knee-jerk reaction. They would be treated as heretical sinners by the high priests of the liner economic order! The automatons who enforce perpetual economic growth by rebuking those who challenge or question it are basically an orthodoxy pillars of a secular fundamentalism that is very parallel to religious orthodoxies who do not want to institutionalize the questioning of heteronormativity. While not a perfect analogy given broader LGBTQ acceptance as of late, it is worth noting that the one gay man currently running for president did not come out until after he won his first election. 

In the early 1980’s we already knew of the AIDS crisis that would endanger many vulnerable lives. But the powers that be, the Reagan administration at the time, refused to address the threat because it was associated with the unfairly stigmatized gay subculture. That is parallel to how scientists at Exxon already knew of the looming climate danger from fossil fuel emissions, with the company deliberately covering up the evidence. And it was followed by periods where the political powers that be refused to address the climate threat, despite it being well documented. 

 Global Warming finally broke into mainstream political awareness in the in the late 1980’s, probably with the congressional testimony of James Hansen in 1988. That coincided with a call to address the AIDS crisis much more intently.

And we saw 2 parallel reactions. The same “Merchants of Doubt” who were marketing denial that cigarettes cause cancer started fabricating and promoting uncertainty about us climate change being real, having human causation or being serious. It is very parallel to how the social engineers against LGBTQ acceptance painted the gay population as not deal (presenting being gay as a choice), being less than fully human and not deserving of rights (denying that climate disruption is human caused) or not being worthy of taken seriously (analogous to climate deniers who admit human causation of global warming but minimize the warming as not serious or a good thing). 

As a result, many of those we thought would be political allies (the top Democrats) calculated in the 1990’s that is was too politically risky to have our backs and came up with Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and Defense of Marriage. In a parallel situation, the Democrats did not take the opportunity upon winning full federal government control in 1992 and 2008 to pass major pro-climate reforms, probably due to it being perceived of as too politically risky.

Meanwhile the Republican platform has long claimed that lending recognition to same sex relationships would be an offense to some definition of traditional values. That is parallel to when former President George HW Bush mentioned climate action follow through of the 1992 Earth Summit would upend an American way of life that is ‘non-negotiable’ and similar statements from other leaders.    

The shrewdest of pro-fossil fuel climate skeptics sidestep denial of climate being real or having human causation and use skepticism about climate models as a way to dismiss anthropogenic climate change from being a serious problem.

This dismissal of climate models is somewhat parallel to the negative stereotypes about the Gay Community being “unreliable, changeable “drama queens” who have a tendency to exaggerate and engage in a bunch of projection”.


There are some well-organized and well-funded groups who are driven to exclude both the climate and LGBTQ social causes. They want expressions of queer acceptance and for climate awareness expressions to be censored from the public, silenced by the mainstream media and restricted from being taught about in schools.

       A movement behind Purity Culture is behind the US Government funding “abstinence-only sex education” in schools.

It is where you teach kids are only about the basic physical mechanics of sex while having to abstain from doing so until marriage. And then this purity culture conveniently defines marriage in a narrow way that excludes the gay population.

     There is similar pressure upon schools to limit climate change education to explaining the physical description of what happens without ascribing causation of it to human activity. Under this denialist culture, teachers and thus students would have to “abstain” from making any connections of human involvement in climate change analogous to promoting abstinence from sexual activity by not teaching about it.


Particularly up until 1975, thousands of Americans lost their government jobs just for being suspected as gay. And today the Trump administration uses similar authoritarian marginalization against government employees who speak and document the truth about climate disruption. And the Trump admin has once again government job protections against LGBTQ discrimination. Censorship against climate scientists somewhat resembles the “public morality raids” the authorities used against the gay population decades ago. The sense of how it is dangerous for climate hawk government employees to express ourselves is very parallel to the societal messages telling the LGBTQ population to just hide in the dark where we can’t be seen.

The stonewalling of investigations into the bad behavior of Exxon (and other intentionally deceptive climate criminals), calls upon us to launch a new Stone Wall Rebellion and a “We don’t have to take it anymore!” flashpoint.


A number of the terms used to classify subtypes within the gay community happen to be the names of animals in the arctic environments: Polar Bears, Sea otters, Arctic wolves, Pups, Cubs


While I acted as heteronormative at the time, coming out as an environmentalist lent me much the same emotional experience that coming out as gay would have at an all-guys boarding school.

No matter how well-researched and sound what I expressed, these bullies chided ecological awareness and passions as if it were a deviant orientation. The social norm was that students were supposed to ascribe to their individual self-interest, and environmental awareness was introducing a form of collectivism. By promoting recycling, the opposition projected an image upon me of being a zealot evangelist who will not letting individuals think for themselves, when that restrictiveness much more accurately described the opposition who basically forbids thinking and acting in collective interests. I refer to it as the Neo-Liberal “straight” Jacket.  Rugged individualists treat collectivism as a deviant orientation, that is dangerous with much the same tone and fervor as how anti-gay bigots cast the LBGTQ population as dangerous, deviant and needing to be restrained. Similar to Anti-LBGTQ blowback, none of the bullies who intimidated my recycling would offer a rational reason that makes sense but is purely reactive.

Pursuing narrow self-interest is considered “acting rational” and the normative thing to do, accepted in the same way as heteronormativity is accepted as the default normal. It is not a perfect analogy because heteronormativity is not actively harmful.

But there is a strong analogy between strict neo-liberals condemning the intentionally planning for the greater good of all as being a deviant collectivist orientation; or simply an abomination against the natural order of how things are supposed to be.

These bullies presented not caring about the good of our planet as a whole felt directly hurtful like being the brunt of anti-gay bullying. Anyone who liked me in that somewhat hypothetical situation didn’t want to be seen hanging out with me due to fear of being bullied themselves.


Ocean Acidification and other climate disruption caused displacement of animal, plant and human life is hauntingly parallel to LGBTQ youth being banished from home and or church.

      The environment which displaced LGBTQ youth relied upon while growing up hence no longer provides. It is analogous to how an acidifying oceanic environment no longer provides for the coral reef habitats, where acidification represents and environment that is less than open and accepting.  The climate deniers would explain away “acidificH8tion” as part of some natural cycle rather than being human caused. Likewise, someone who is ant-gay would explain away homophobic social environments as just naturally the way things are or are meant to be. Both serve as justifications for doing nothing to address either anti-gay exclusion or climate disaster mitigation.