The Parasitic Cycle: Colonialism and the Language of Climate Exclusion

It seems we often treat climate change as a new crisis. However, for many, it is just the final stage of centuries of colonial exploitation and abuse. 

We see a pattern over the many instances and tragedies brought by such greed and corruption through out the world and history. Imperial-like powers who see themselves as more "civilized" refuse to account for the fact that they themselves are also animals a part of this world. 

We see time and time again such imbalanced egos swarm the lush and fertile parts of Earth with motives of short term greed and extraction. 

The Industrialization of the "Expendable"

The parasite does not leave when the host is exhausted, but simply imports a new host to continue their traumatic cycle of extraction and exploitation. 

As one example among many, let us review the history of the indigenous Taino people in Jamaica. Jamaica was mainly exploited by, but not limited to, the Spanish and British colonial powers. When the vibrant, culturally rich Taino peoples were decimated by unethical, forced labor and disease, the colonial machinery didn't pause, and the light-skinned and eyed man did not form a conscience. Instead, that system pivoted to the Trans-Atlantic slave trade and forged on with its greed. 

It is an industrial "replacement parts" logic applied directly onto human beings and Earth. Multiple Indigenous peoples across the world were viewed as "expendable" and simply replaced with more human beings to maintain their flow of wealth and influence. 

This is the backbone of colonial capitalism: a system that does not care about limits, that assumes there will always be more "expendable" people, more "unowned" land to exploit, and more "uncivilized" tribes to domesticate. 

Today, we see the modern evolution of this apathy. While the world begs for some sort of collective sanity and call to action, the descendants of these colonizers sit in air-conditioned rooms, wearing expensive suits, and signing away the future of our climate for oil profits. These suits remain apathetic to the ecological collapse they inherit and accelerate, proving that for the colonizer, greed is a more sacred tradition than life itself.

The Checkmate painting by Moritz Retzsch.

The Architecture of Enforced Dependency

This logic of "replacement parts" extends beyond human society and into the very soil. Colonial powers re-wrote and domesticated the landscape by focusing on aesthetics or cash crops instead of food-bearing trees and indigenous flora. By doing this, colonial powers severed our natural, rightful access to nourishment and self-sovereignty. This is a deliberate strategy to kill local intuition and self-sufficiency.

When you can no longer pick fruit from a tree in your own surroundings, you are forced into the colonial corporate store. You are forced to "play" without consent just to survive. This shift from sustainable intuitive foraging to capitalistic dependency is not progress but rather should be seen as a siege. 

It replaces the nourishing, diverse Earth with a sterile "product" that you must spend colonial currency to obtain, ensuring that even our physical surroundings and simple rights such as eating, hydrating, etc., remain under the colonial capitalistic thumb. 

The Intersecting Pillars of Shame and Conformity 

The ongoing ecological and spiritual collapse we now face in 2026 is the direct result of a world built on white "supremacy", patriarchy, and religious exceptionalism. This colonial, capitalistic, relentless greed is enabled by a specific narrative of power that has been reinforced for thousands of years. These systems efficiently work together to reinforce the disparities and culture that will allow their extraction to continue without accountability. 

White Man's Religion

"White man's" religion has been used as a tool of domestication, especially for indigenous. By replacing indigenous faiths with the white man's god, colonial powers forced indigenous people to kiss the feet of a deity that mirrored their oppressors. This system weaponizes shame and labels indigenous traditions as sinful, which in turn hijacks their spirit.

The Patriarchy of Nature

There is a significant link between the exploitation of women and the exploitation of the Earth. In colonial language, the Earth is often feminized: a "virgin" land to be "penetrated," "conquered," and "mastered." The very logic used to justify "raping" the land without consent for self-greed and resources. 

The Language of "Better"

Colonial systems enforce a binary, a so called "correct" way of being a "human", as if all animals are not born with intuition which is applicable to the land beneath them without needing to spend colonial currency to obtain. If you do not look "civilized" and if you don't speak the language of the "academic" or the pious colonizer, your intuition and your suffering are discredited.

This linguistic gatekeeping is a tactic used to make the colonizer seem larger than nature itself. By controlling the laws and the very definitions and of "progress", it is ensured that the people, often the descendants of those very same "expendable" hosts, are most affected by climate change and displacement. 

Climate justice is inseparable from racial justice because the same logic that fueled the slave trade now fuels the fossil fuel industry, with paperwork dictating it as "legal".

This physical act of worship—a Black man kissing a white Jesus on a crucifix illustrates the "domestication" of indigenous spirituality through the enforcement of colonial, patriarchal religion.

The Climate Crisis and the Consequences of Denial and Supression

 

When it comes to the climate crisis, the beginning of Donald Trump’s second term in the white house was truly unprecedented and shocking. He reveals to the public that we have entered a national energy emergency, stating how the costs of energy are rising drastically. But what can we attach to these statements? To begin, we need to understand the relationship between energy efficiency and carbon emissions. In 2023, a report titled: “2023 Energy Efficiency Impact Report”, released by Alliance stated the many benefits of energy efficiency as the costs rise. Some notable points demonstrated in the report are working to reduce carbon emissions, while also creating job opportunities. In the report, it is stated:  “Today, 40% of all energy jobs in the U.S. relate to energy efficiency – totaling 2.2 million workers in 2021. The report also reinforces energy efficiency as a key climate solution: in 2021, the U.S. would have produced 78% higher carbon emissions without the energy efficiency investments already in place.”  This directly opposes what Trump had said in regards to how America “needs” to use fossil fuels even though we are seeing the negative impacts on our planet. The report  illustrates how energy efficiency fuels the economy, stating:  “The majority of states are implementing energy efficiency resource standards and have seen 4x energy savings compared to states without a standard.  States that invest in utility energy efficiency programs have also been shown to save more for customers.  On top of that, building energy codes have reduced energy use in new buildings by more than 40% over three decades.”   Even in a report by The Natural Resources Defense Council, they talk about how harnessing technology to help reduce carbon emissions, it seems confusing why more people aren’t more aware of these statistics, to answer that, it is because of Trump’s ideas of trying to deny and abandon the people who are affected by climate change.

(Above), Image of an individual using a more energy efficient setting on their washing machine.

[Photo credit: StockX]

 While observing the objectives written by authors of Project 2025, the climate crisis is completely denied and ignored, as it claims that America has   “No reason to transition away from fossil fuels. Instead, they doubled down on oil and gas, long the federal government’s most incentivized “winner” of energy subsidies. Domestic fossil fuel production is to be encouraged still further, while federal support for cleaner alternatives is to be curbed or eliminated.”  This alone should be cause for alarm, as creating and maintaining sustainable forms of energy is already way more difficult as it is, and now these resources will begin to disappear. In another section, specifically, Unnameable Challenge #3–Scenic and Ecological Preservation, it is illustrated that oil extraction is going to be heavily prioritized, which could damage the habitats of endangered species. There are already over 1,000 endangered species in the United States alone, and that number will slowly increase, especially with the increasing amount of natural disasters. 

(Above) Statistics of the costs from climate-related natural disasters from 1980-2021.

[Photo Credit: Climate.gov]

Despite the fact that climate change is becoming more and more impactful, The Trump Administration has tried to sweep things under the rug as if the climate crisis is nonexistent, determined to ignore warnings in order to feed their immense desire for money. In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency was forced to retract information which determined that climate change is a threat to public health and welfare in 2009. They were also forced to eliminate clean vehicle standards, which would’ve cut down the amount of carbon emissions significantly. According to Manish Bapna, the president & CEO of NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council): “This is the single biggest attack in history on the federal government’s efforts to tackle the climate crisis. Nearly 20 years after the Supreme Court confirmed the EPA’s authority to act, the Trump Administration is leaving American families on their own to deal with the consequences. With millions of Americans facing stronger storms, hotter heat waves, and more dangerous wildfires, the Trump administration is trying to pretend it’s all a hoax and there’s nothing to be done about it. But the impacts of climate change are right here, right now.” In turn, Trump is essentially abandoning the people that will be left behind at the mercy of our planet’s rising heat. On the other hand, all the billionaires would be living it up without worry since the people’s money will pay for their survival. The whole point of the Environmental Protection Agency is supposed to protect people, but it is crystal clear that Trump is ultimately trying to erase resources intended for the sole purpose of educating people on the climate crisis.





According to the U.S Geological Survey, there are effects such as loss of agriculture, increased heat waves, natural disasters, and species loss. Despite the abundance of resources people can use, they are slowly being deleted, as detailed in an article published by E&E News, the Trump Administration has been deleting billions of dollars worth of climate research from Climate.gov, which makes accessibility for educational resources extremely difficult. E&E News states how: “Meanwhile, the government itself has become an antagonist to many of the groups trying to preserve its vanishing resources. The Trump administration has promoted a variety of scientific misinformation this year, researchers say, including widely discredited theories about vaccines and climate change.” proving that it is important to educate and preserve resources illuminating the climate crisis.

(Below) EPA employees take part in a national march against actions by the Trump administration last March in Philadelphia.

[Photo Credit: Matt Rourke]

Trump Administration's Suppression of Climate Research

The Main Issue

 The Trump Administration, through his first and at an increased amount in his second term, has gone to great lengths to remove access to scientific information and research over a variety of topics. One area that is being consistently attacked in climate research--- no doubt fueled by his multitude of public dismissals and denials of the impending detrimental climate change impacts.

What's Happening?

Website pages run by federal agencies about topics including climate adaptation and resilience, climate impacts, and the government’s responsibility in addressing climate change are being altered or removed according to the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative (EDGI). Websites are reported to have been removed entirely, or their contents have been altered or access has been restricted. 

This has further implications, as in his first term there was suppression of webpages about climate information, but some agencies like the EPA remained untouched comparatively. Now, since August 2025 the EPA has lost several pages accounting things like the implications of climate change, resources for adaptation, and tools to evaluate risk and adaptation methods have been removed. 

The National Climate Assessment was among one of the peer reviewed authoritative reports that the Trump administration suppressed, removing access to the site and reports of information. The Guardian quotes climate scientist Kathy Jacobs stating that the National Climate Assessment is “the most reliable and well reviewed source of information about climate” within the US. Beyond the quotes, The Guardian reports that the report was used for things like deciding whether to raise roads, build seawalls, or move hospital generators to higher ground, according to Harvard climate scientist John Holdren.

The Global Change Research Act made it a requirement for a national climate assessment to take place every four years, and for the president to establish a United States Global Change Research Program. The Trump administration refused the work of the volunteer authors of the next climate assessment and ended their contract with the firm that oversaw the website and report in the spring of 2025. 

The following federal agencies are reported to have removed content surrounding climate change from their websites, as reported by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law: the Department of Defense, the US Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, and the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department, and the White House. 

Figure from Visualizing changes to US federal environmental agency websites, 2016–2020, showing the difference between the EPA website in 2016 to 2020.

Targeting

The EDGI Report revealed that the biggest targets for the suppression efforts "included the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts and environmental justice"--- unsurprising when considered along side his continued efforts to remove protections and execute attacks on minority and disadvantaged groups. On January 20th, programs, offices, and positions surrounding DEI and environmental justice were eliminated via Trump's signing of an executive order. 

What's Being Done?

Sadly, we are again forced to rely on ourselves instead of the government we live under. Though it is an extreme task for a group of people to take on, many individuals are committed to trying to preserve data surrounding climate change research despite the suppression of the information from the current administration. According to Environment & Energy News (E&E News by Politico), efforts to fight back in the battle for public knowledge meet the obstacle of minimal funding, with canceled grants and dramatic funding cuts from the Trump administration creating a fight for resources among scientific organizations. Another obstacle is the need for a “rapid response” to combat the loss of information by archiving federal datasets. After the deletion of climate information that came with the first Trump administration, scientists began this project after the second election. With the amplitude of projects and the constant threat of suppression, the archivists find it “hard to decide which ones to prioritize." E&E News goes on to talk about options of fighting back in the legislature, with the example of The Environmental Defense Fund and the Union of Concerned Scientists lawsuit to block the administration's proposed repealing of the endangerment fund, a foundational scientific report emphasizing the harms of global warming. The basis for what the public can do to preserve our right for access to climate information is to contribute to efforts in archiving datasets, supporting scientists working to fight back against the administration, and the be aware of the need to look deeper to find information about climate change.

Figure from a recent post from the EDGI showing the correlation between regulations and the suppression of information on government agency websites.

Why Fossil‑Fuel Messaging Works: A Psychological Look at Climate Politics

Climate politics in the United States is shaped not only by policy decisions but also by the psychological strategies embedded in political language. Genevieve Guenther’s The Language of Climate Politics argues that fossil‑fuel interests have spent decades shaping public narratives about energy, responsibility, and climate action. Even though her book was written before the current administration, her framework combined with basic psychological concepts helps explain several patterns visible today in federal climate messaging.




Public demonstrations highlight the tension between political messaging and climate science. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/29/us/politics/peoples-climate-march-trump.html

One of the clearest patterns Guenther identifies is the framing of fossil‑fuel expansion as a symbol of national strength. Psychologically, this taps into social identity theory the idea that people derive pride and belonging from group membership. When political leaders frame oil and gas production as “American energy,” they activate identity‑based loyalty rather than encouraging critical evaluation. This makes climate policy feel like a cultural battle instead of a scientific issue. Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that domestic fossil‑fuel output continues to rise, and these increases are often celebrated as patriotic achievements rather than climate risks.

Guenther also describes the use of delay rhetoric, which acknowledges climate change but argues that action must wait for better technology or lower costs. This aligns with the psychological concept of temporal discounting the tendency to undervalue long‑term risks compared to short‑term comfort or economic gain. When leaders emphasize the “future” readiness of renewables, they reinforce a natural human bias to avoid immediate change. Yet analyses from the International Energy Agency show that renewable energy is already the fastest‑growing source of new power globally.

Another theme Guenther highlights is the reframing of climate policy as a threat to personal freedom. Psychologically, this taps into reactance, a well‑documented response where people resist rules or policies they perceive as limiting autonomy. When emissions standards or electric‑vehicle incentives are described as “government overreach,” the emotional reaction becomes stronger than the factual discussion. Research from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication shows how these narratives deepen polarization and shape public opinion.





Renewable energy continues to expand despite political narratives that frame it as unreliable. https://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/solar-panels/renewable-energy-vs-fossil-fuels

Guenther argues that countering fossil‑fuel propaganda requires naming responsibility clearly and speaking directly about the human impacts of climate inaction. This approach aligns with psychological research on framing effects, which shows that people respond more strongly to messages that emphasize human stories, moral responsibility, and concrete consequences. Scientists, journalists, and community organizers who highlight extreme‑weather impacts, environmental injustice, and the economic opportunities of clean energy are using precisely the kind of framing Guenther recommends.

Her book ultimately reminds us that climate politics is not only about policy choices but also about the stories we tell and the psychological responses those stories trigger. Understanding how language shapes perception helps us analyze current federal actions more effectively and communicate more honestly about the stakes of the climate crisis.

 

The Attempted Murder of the Rice's Whale

From ages thirteen through seventeen I was a volunteer employee at the Toledo Zoo. To this day I identify as a conservationist, and fight to protect wildlife. This is why I was heartbroken to learn that President Donald Trump is looking for an exemption from the Endangered Species Act to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The Endangered Species Act is supposed to protect wildlife that is listed as threatened or endangered. To be considered endangered, there must be less than 2,500 left in the wild. Some of the animals in the Gulf of Mexico the Endangered Species Act is protecting are the green sea turtle (threatened), the leatherback sea turtle (endangered), and the sperm whale (endangered).

Right now, the Endangered Species Act is preventing President Trump from expanding oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. President Trump is looking for a national security exemption to expand oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. The president’s exact plan for the Gulf is unclear, but it will put the marine life in danger, including the Rice’s whale. Only about 50 Rice’s whales are left in the wild. 

My brother grew up watching Chris and Martin Kratt on Wild Kratts, a kids’ show where the Kratt brothers travel the world learning about and protecting wildlife. I, like many of us, grew up watching the crocodile hunter, Steve Irwin. In recent years, Steve Irwin’s son, Robert Irwin, brought conservation back to the minds of the public. All three of these conservationists have one goal in common: protect the wildlife. And they help do so by bringing people’s attention to these animals through television and social media.

Steve Irwin

 

I am not a famous conservationist, but I did spend my teen years teaching people about conservation and why it is important to care for wildlife. My favorite story from when I was a ZOOTeen is when I was working a summer camp. These two young girls—they must have been no more than eight—kept looking at the signs outside the animal's enclosures. They kept noticing the “Endangered Species” symbol on the signs and got very upset that the animals were going extinct. Finally, I told them that the symbol under the endangered species one was for the Species Survival Plan, a program where zoos work together to keep endangered species alive. I explained to the girls why it was important and that as adults they can help keep these animals alive. That day I watched two young girls start to care about conservation. 

The fact that something as simple as a symbol can get two eight-year-old so upset about endangered animals that they suddenly want to fight for conservation says people do care about wildlife. I am disgusted that President Trump would put these beautiful, endangered creatures at risk for oil when environmentally sustainable options are just waiting for someone to sign off on them. Oil should never be more important than our environment. 

 

How Language Shapes Climate Discussion

    Language shapes public opinion on climate change. In Genevieve Guenther's "The Language of Climate Politics" she provides a framework for understanding how language can shape public opinion. She analyzes that common words like "cost" or "growth" are used in specific ways that reinforces and maintains interest in fossil-fuels. I believe her insights are highly relevant to us now despite her writing this book before Donald Trump's second presidency began. Her work reminds us that the words typically used in political discussion aren’t neutral. Their wording actively shapes what policies the public deems necessary.

    One of her key arguments is that fossil-fuel propaganda works by shaping how people think about climate action. This happens especially through the exaggeration of the economic "cost" of change. Guenther argues that this narrative and others like it falsely inflate the financial burden of transitioning to clean energy, even though research shows decarbonization can benefit society overall. This idea can be connected to the current political discussion around climate change and energy issues. By emphasizing economic risk, political messaging can make meaningful climate action appear more optional than urgent.

Hawaii Flood

   

Byford Dolphin Drilling Rig

    

    Scientific evidence strongly contradicts these narratives. Climate change is primarily caused by human activity, with widespread consequences that are already occurring across the globe. Research consistently shows that temperatures are rising globally along with sea levels, reinforcing the urgency that current political language often ignores or minimizes. In many cases, communication about climate change in politics focuses on local solutions rather than directly confronting the global scale of climate change. This framing reduces the pressure on policymakers to act quickly.

    Another important concept in this book is "greenwashing," when companies and political figures promote solutions that are misleading such as carbon capture or "clean" fossil fuels to create the illusion of progress. Guenther argues that these strategies allow for continued use of fossil fuels while avoiding any meaningful changes. This approach can be seen in how political leaders and media fail to address the systemic dependence on fossil fuels.

    Climate change is not just a scientific issue, it's also a communication problem. Fossil fuel propaganda works by shaping narratives, creating doubt, and delaying action. In today's political landscape, these issues are unfortunately extremely relevant. By recognizing the influence language has on public perspectives, we can better evaluate political claims and advocate for more science-based discussion. Effective communication must convey the large-scale consequences of climate change so that the public are compelled to act.

The Greatest Con-Job in the World - Cass Bradford

"This 'climate change,' it's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion," Trump said. "All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their countries fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success. If you don't get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail"

President Donald J. Trump

On September 23rd, 2025, Donald Trump, current president of the U.S., declared that ‘climate change’ is the greatest con job in the world. This declaration was made at the U.N. almost one year after Hurricane Helena hit Florida, a category four storm that killed over 250 people. Despite this and the increasing evidence that human driven climate change is exacerbating the power of natural disasters, the Trump administration holds strong in their belief. To them, climate change is nothing but a scam. President Trump employs a few of the key terms that Genevieve Guenther describes as dominating “The Language of Climate Politics”, the title of her book. The first two chapters are titled “Alarmist” and “Cost”, the two terms that Trump wields in his flippant comment. It was not the first time President Trump has criticized climate activists. Nor will it be his last play to overrule any progress the U.S. has made towards reducing its climate impacts, according to his recent eliminations (endangerment findings). 

The aftermath of Hurricane Helena near Horseshoe Beach, Florida (Photo:  Chandan Khanna—AFP/Getty Images)

While President Trump perpetuates his beliefs and plans, Hawaii, as of March 28th, is beginning to rebuild after its worst flooding in decades. This flooding has only brought more attention to how devastating rising sea levels can be to island nations, causing disasters so terrible their future is at risk. Countries like Tuvalu are in danger of drowning out of existence. Real consequences, the loss of human lives, have already happened due to the effects of climate change and yet, when people advocate for change, they’re told they’re making it up. Alarmist, doomer, and stupid, are used against the most prominent advocate to someone who chooses to be more mindful of their gas use.

Flooding in Hawaii 03/24/2026 (Photo:Tutehau Hunkin)

Tuvalu's Foreign Minister, Simon Kofe (Photo:Tuvalu Foreign Ministry/Reuters)

With these disasters in mind, the Trump administration's comments surrounding climate change seem far more devious than beneficial. What good does it do the American people when their president tells them they aren’t drowning as the water rises to their chests? More importantly, why? How does ignoring a climate crisis benefit the U.S.? 

The short answer is, it doesn’t, at least not for the majority of U.S. citizens. However, it is extremely beneficial to large corporations and the government's pockets. Ignoring climate issues and denying the human impact takes the weight off of the government's shoulders. The administration has also cut billions in clean energy grants while increasing subsidies for gas and oil. Collin Reeves, United States Campaigns Manager at Oil Change International, said “The Trump Administration uses ‘free market’ rhetoric to disguise its preferential treatment of the fossil fuel industry,” Rees said. “Trump doesn’t want the public to understand that he’s using our money to enrich the fossil fuel CEOs and investors who drive the climate crisis.”. Trump's own administration has taken to pointing out the need for federal tax breaks in solar and wind energy while forgetting to mention the extra 4 billion a year in tax dollars that they’d given to the fossil fuel industry.

 The hypocrisy is evident, complaining that countries have spent too much on climate change while giving billions to gas and oil companies. Blatant lies and specially picked terms are used by Trump and his administrations to spin climate change into a fantasy made up by activists to cost taxpayers more money while propagating the thought that fossil fuels are the way to go. However, they won’t be around forever and as us in the U.S. are learning today, gas won’t always be affordable either. As Guenther states on pages 67-68, “To help neutralize this propaganda, you can emphasize instead the costs of climate damages, using alarming examples from the extreme weather that is already emerging all around us. And you can connect these examples to the broader economic point that if the world does not phase out fossil fuels, the cost of climate change will potentially be infinite, inasmuch as unchecked global heating threatens to end the human adventure on this planet.”