Those concerned about climate change, from scientists to journalists to politicians, have a plethora of theories why the United States, almost alone among the nations of the developed world, seems resistant to acting to avoid the worst of the consequences.
Update: A handful of possibilities are discussed this week in The Economist, which doesn't provide links or other authentication, but nonetheless makes a lot of sense. Here's their favorite, seemingly:
Political: The fact that Democrats are always hammering on about climate change and Republicans aren't suggests that this is a political issue, not a scientific one. This creates a feedback loop: if climate change were real, why is it so polarising? Because it's so polarising, it must be slightly suspicious.
The magazine goes on to suggest clean energy as a ladder out of this morass, as if every virtually every Democrat under the sun hadn't already pitched this idea, repeatedly, with modest success.
Here's one idea overlooked by the magazine. The fact that the U.S. is the most television-dependent of nations, with 99% penetration into the market. Or so the late Neil Postman would say. Pointing out that the average American has seen one million television commercials by the age of forty, he adds:
A person who has seen one million television commercials might well believe that all political problems have fast solutions through easy answers — or ought to.
From Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, 1985
Kit Stolz 