There’s a grim symmetry between the existential cadence of Harold Ramis’ 1993 classic Groundhog Day and our current climate moment in all its grand fury.
It’s not just the parallels evoked by the universe of awfulness that envelopes the misanthropic weatherman Phil Connors (Bill Murray) and which increasingly lend content to the bleak strokes of today and tomorrow. The similarities coalesce more closely around the agony that arises when confronted with gargantuan monotony and the weight of its ensuing futility.
The achievement of Groundhog Day was to distil these feelings in a comedy that functions, at its mind-bending margins, as horror. It more or less begins when the dissatisfied and uncongenial Connors finds himself (for reasons never explained) trapped in a time loop, doomed seemingly forever to relive Groundhog Day in a cloying limbo: same people, same conditions, same everything. From there he treks a caged wilderness blurred by confusion and resignation, eventually embracing nihilism as you would a long-time friend.
At his nadir, a stultified Connors memorably steals a car, driving both himself and the bewildered groundhog Thelma & Louise-style off a cliff in a bid to smash the time loop. Another time he throws himself off a tall building with all the elegance of an Olympic diver, while on other days he alternately stands in front of a truck and duly drops the hotel’s communal toaster into his bathtub. Eventually he gives up on escape and simply toys with the freedom conferred by zero consequences: eating non-stop, manipulating people and playing God.
Trapped but immortal, he comes to ask: “What would you do if you were stuck in one place, and every day was exactly the same, and nothing that you did mattered?”
It’s a question that resonates with the climate crisis in a way that the film’s solid redemptive arc doesn’t. Like Connors for much of the film, no matter what we do, no matter how much pressure is brought to bear on government, no matter how many warnings climate scientists repeatedly publish, we seem forever trapped in a wasteland of climate denial, hypocrisy and deceit finessed by government conceit. But unlike Connors, in our lived reality the subtext of Groundhog Day may as well be text: there’s nowhere to go, there’s no escape, the crisis is here.
We can discern this in federal Labor, which won government pledging to end the climate wars and transform the country into a “renewable energy superpower”. A party, in other words, elected on the mellifluous understanding it could and would act on the existential threat posed by runaway global warming.
Since assuming power, however, this same party has exploited the absence of a climate trigger in federal environmental laws to approve four new coalmines — bringing the number of fossil-fuel projects approved under this legislation to 740 — while doing little to alter the nation’s unenviable status as a “planet wrecker”, a title which flows inexorably from its standing as the third largest exporter of fossil fuels worldwide.
As things stand, both the recent and planned expansion of oil and gas extraction in Australia by itself has been calculated to give way to some 12.6 billion tonnes in additional emissions, an amount International Oil Change says is equivalent to the lifetime emissions of 25 new coal plants. But unruffled and unperturbed as ever, the Albanese government soldiers on, quietly championing the continued expansion of fossil-fuel projects through the billions it funnels the sector under the benign-sounding Export Finance Australia and the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility.
It’s in this way Groundhog Day speaks to the weight and sheer frustration of climate anxiety. That sense of time moving forward — of progress being made — is reduced to a monstrous deception. The same phenomenon is brought to the fore in the various other assaults the government wields against the observable reality of global warming. Among them its proposed changes to CO2 sea dumping laws; its underreporting of annual greenhouse gas pollution; its failure or refusal to purge the Climate Change Authority of all those with links to the fossil-fuel industry, and, not least, its blind faith in the wholly discredited, fossil-fuel appeasing technology of carbon capture storage.
When confronted, the government shrinks from these inconvenient truths, hiding behind its tapestry of empty climate targets and its flawed climate policy, though notably ignoring the ways in which the latter, by design, likewise permit fossil-fuel expansion under the (probably illegal) scam of carbon credits.
And so, in much the same vein as Sonny and Cher’s “I’ve Got You Babe” unfailingly reminds Connors every morning of his trapped existence, so too does Labor’s unnerving attempts to speak reality into existence remind us of ours. “We have addressed the challenge of climate change by taking it seriously,” declares Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. “You’re seeing it, and you’ll see more of it,” he repeats weeks later. That is, “We have acted, because I say so,” never mind the myriad actions to the contrary.
If you feel gaslit, it’s because you are. Where once the challenge was to overcome gaudy climate denialism in all its obvious and ugly manifestations, today it resides in the thorny dissonance created by pledges that few, it would seem, are prepared to keep.
In such climate hypocrisy Australia hardly stands alone, as the experiences of both the Biden administration in the US and Canada’s Trudeau government so painfully attest. But it nonetheless remains disorienting in a more profound way to watch leaders do away with outright climate denial and replace it with a level of climate concern that bears no relationship to their genuine commitments.
In this version of Groundhog Day, both the leading cast and their lines are subject to change, but never the story’s underlying plot: the antecedents of climate denialism remain fixed and unmoving, whether or not climate activists have won the rhetorical war on global warming.
This might explain, at least in part, why more than one in two Australians today do not consider climate change with the urgency it deserves, notwithstanding the increasing pace of climate destruction. Though it’s possible that some have truly been blinded by the government’s deceit, it’s likely in the case of others that the rhetorical whiplash of knowing otherwise has simply caused them to gravitate towards the nihilism of surrender. To feel distanced from both time and reality itself — the idea that nothing ever changes so therefore nothing ever matters, as Connors puts it.
But here, in this moment, Connors’ logic doubles as both reality and fiction. Reality, because no honest appraisal of the Albanese government can escape the conclusion it is exacerbating global warming. And fiction, because our environment — unlike that of Connors — is not fixed, but literally deteriorating before our eyes under the forces unleashed by global warming. We’re stuck in a time loop, yes, but one that shifts us ever closer to midnight and down the road to oblivion.
And therein lies the bracing horror of our version of Groundhog Day. Before us looms a seemingly endless stream of tomorrows, all coloured in deepening shades of unheralded suffering. But one day civilisation will meet a final tomorrow, and there the plot of our climate moment begins to fade.
This is the tragedy that awaits should government fail — in a way that Connors didn’t — to break our climate loop.
Are you one of those Australians who isn’t particularly perturbed by climate change? Let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
All true, and that’s horrific. In case there was any doubt before the last election, it is now beyond any doubt the Coalition and Labor are just two sides of one coin when it comes to keeping on track to heat the planet to destruction. The Labor version involves more hypocrisy, weasel-words and deception, but in the end Labor ignores the evidence of global warming and the need for action as surely as the Coalition. There is no excuse for voting for any of these parties.
Yes, and global heating is progressing exponentially, which means that the time available for effective action is decreasing exponentially. Even now, when we may have passed a crucial tipping point, there are still ways of slowing down our progress towards the inevitable disaster.
Economic rationalism in full bloom
There’s nothing rational about it.
Economic rationalism has created efficiencies, it has effectively siphoned profit from the community and directed it to a comparative few.
The politicians that were decent that sung its praises must be gobsmacked at how much power the change gave the few, to a large degree because transparency became much harder to keep up . Another efficiency if you’re in that camp and very rational.
Typical of neoliberalism it required a tweak of the language and high repetition and no questions asked by media. The term must be economic rationale ,.. the exclusion of empathy and ethics.
We are the only so-called intelligent species that is destroying our habitat. That’s just not rational.
But flawed economic rationalism. I think its narcissistic economic rationalism, as only the economic systems supporting the politician’s immediate personal wellbeing is deemed rational, and everything outside of that bubble, no matter how well scientifically credentialed, is ignored or vilified. Thus protecting existing ecosystems from destruction, on land and sea, from all extractive practices becomes insignificant, in the face of their own personal power and position and the support of those who support them in that space. Power parasites, feeding on the positions maintained for them by their supporting primary parasitic corporate conglomerates.
Yes it’s all true, but no, LNP and Labor are not the same. Don’t you recall Abbot in particular actively destroying what few progressive policies there were. And now, they are pushing the rediculous distraction of Nuclear. There is a huge list of actively regressive actions.
Then again, I guess the end result may be the same, whether you get there by omission or commission.
And I also agree, don’t vote for any of them.
The only party that will have my vote is the Greens. They are the only ones we can trust on Climate
The Greens rolled over and took it from Abbott, of all people, to destroy the only effective climate law we ever had, the carbon tax. You sure you can trust the Greens? Agree you cant vote for the others either. We need a new party. ASAP.
That’s crap. The Greens supported Rudd’s carbon price from the start. They only withdrew support after Rudd became far too clever by half, obsessed with the possibility of wedging the Liberals, and he watered down and changed the rules of the scheme to the point where the compensation on offer to the carbon emitters became so very generous they were an incentive to continue and increase emissions. The policy had become the reverse of itself. So the Greens had no choice but to reject it, and they were absolutely right. It says something about the quality of the media and the public discourse in this country that the truth has been so grossly distorted in a successful propaganda campaign to traduce and smear the Greens for doing the right thing. It is Rudd that wrecked his own policy.
And as a bonus Rudd’s clever-dick moves did wedge the Liberals and destroyed Turnbull’s first stint as leader. That put Abbott in charge, which obviously made the Liberals unelectable for a generation and cemented Rudd in power for several terms… oh, wait…
That’s bollox. The Greens supported Rudd’s carbon price from the start. They only withdrew support after Rudd became far too clever by half, obsessed with the possibility of wedging the Liberals, and he watered down and changed the rules of the scheme to the point where the compensation on offer to the carbon emitters became so very generous they were an incentive to continue and increase emissions. The policy had become the reverse of itself. So the Greens had no choice but to reject it, and they were absolutely right. It says something about the quality of the media and the public discourse in this country that the truth has been so grossly distorted in a successful propaganda campaign to traduce and smear the Greens for doing the right thing. It is Rudd that wrecked his own policy.
And as a bonus Rudd’s smarty-pants moves did wedge the Liberals and destroyed Turnbull’s first stint as leader. That put Abbott in charge, which obviously made the Liberals unelectable for a generation and cemented Rudd in power for several terms… oh, wait…
Rubbish. You are conflating Rudd’s CPRS, which Rudd negotiated with Turnbull’s Coalition while barring the Greens from having any say, resulting in a pile of ordure worse than nothing, with Gillard’s carbon ‘tax’, which they negotiated into existence with her.
Not so. The confusion is all Lawsonr93’s. I am not conflating anything, just sticking with the true history of the Labor measure the Greens did vote against, not the rest of the garbled mess in the comment I replied to, which mashes up the whole of the Rudd-Gillard era.
Corrections:
(1) The reference to Lawson93 in the my comment immediately above should of course be Michael Smith. My apologies to Lawsonr93.
(2) The above is redundant anyway because MAC089 is replying to Michael Smith , not to me, and I entirely agree with MAC089.
Apologies to everybody.
I clearly said they are not the same, and my comment was clearly concerned with global emissions; just two sides of one coin, which is no substantial action to limit activities of our fossil fuel industries. Don’t be fooled by Abbott being more obvious than Albanese or whatever, they are both taking us to the same destination even if there are slight variations in the chosen route.
But since you mention Abbott getting rid of whatever progressive policies there were; how keen is Albanese is to reinstate those policies? And if Albanese leaves things as he found them when the Coalition left office, is he not simply a continuation of their work? His enthusiastic endorsement of the stage three tax cuts, AUKUS and so on shows that he is. This is not Albanese being timid or any such thing, all that we see and hear from him shows he really believes in this stuff.
Apologies, that was a careless reading, I’m a bit twitchy about how uniquely terrible the Morison Abbot years were – however disastrous things are currently.
Agree, the old nuclear card has done the round of the Anglosphere to delay and deflect transition, while there degrees of difference pardon the pun; when one speaks to family, friends and community, one is shocked by those claiming to be centrist, environmental and right on, but don’t do anything…..
While most are blissfully ignorant, encouraged by MSM, those claiming to be concerned about global warming & climate science, but show symptoms of both avoidance of science and constraints, while demanding their own freedom to be slack.
Too easy for many Australians, inc non LNP voters, to deflect to and blame immigration and/or population growth for environmental issues, demanding constraints, but not on fossil fuels or emissions, because that would cramp their style eg. supposed cost of living increases, then more directly refusal to separate rubbish and continue using (ever bigger) IC vegicles for short trips?
Excellent summation, but what a tragedy. We on the left had hoped for a climate change renaissance with the election of the Albanese government. We were grieviously disappointed and with the Albanese government pointing to small improvements and treating them as major improvements. Even more so the approval of new CSG and coal mines. To those of us who have been following this debate since the first major early warnings in 1972, we who have written letters, marched in the streets, run for parliament (under 2 banners), attended meetings and witnessed speeches by experts, this is now a moment to acknowledge defeat. We know what defeat will mean to our children and grandchilden, but we have run out of puff, and the only thing we can do is say sorry.
If I were younger, despite being a pacifist, I would declare war on the things (not the people) that are destroying us. The coal mines, the gas plants and the banks would all be targets, but alas, I am past that, and in a few short years will go to my maker cursing him and his acolytes.
Why would a creator build a world where evil triumphs? It doesn’t make sense.
Maybe this creator didn’t care about the fate of the world … or was amused by the result … or simply enjoyed the suffering created …
It makes as much sense as imagining a creator in the first place.
If there is a maker, and it is a very big if, then he/she/it may simply have given humans free will. As in we are responsible for our own actions – which have real consequences. I know it is a horrifying thought for the kind of people who expect god to do all the heavy lifting for them.
My local Labor MP says Australia has to support fossil fuel development, or else the Australian economy will be trashed. He said the ALP would not be re-elected if the economy was trashed. No doubt this is what the ALP have been briefing MPs to talk about when challenged on climate inaction. The ALP is more disgusting than the LNP. The LNP never cared but the hypocrisy of the ALP is something to behold. I hope the ALP and LNP never form a majority government again. Vote 1 the Greens or Teals.
And today’s Crikey Worm included a piece on Labor’s Resources Minister Madeleine King going all-in for fossil fuels, for all the world like Matt ‘Minister for Coal’ Canavan in drag. Come to think of it, has anyone ever seen Madeleine King and Matt Canavan in the same room at the same time?
Little does he know how bad the economy will be when the planet starts calling in its debts
The flood of misinformation particularly based on fear of economic pressure is a well worn track, it has caused most people to stick their head in the sand .
A government that has been given the keys because it agreed to not make changes to the corporate powers that be , is in a difficult position. It wanted to be elected even though it knew it would have to ignore existential realities.
Is there a movie about a group wanting the poisoned chalice because it was going to be worth it until it wasn’t?
Jones Town massacre?
We have our mainstream media propaganda machine to thank for keeping up appearances and not refuting rubbish.
I suspect they’re in don’t frighten the horses mode , don’t act until there is no choice, leaving the perpetrators with as much trading time as possible .
Advertising runs this world. Billions of useless trashy kitch produced daily around the world and sold. Internet use uses unbelievable amounts of electricity – its expanding. Corporations speak of employment benefits for individuals and the nation.
Countries fighting (economically only as yet) for scarce resource minerals. Droughts in many areas of the earth. Or floods. The UN helpless.
Corporate has won as far as I am concerned.
MSM supports the corporate world.
Not hopeful for future inventions to “save the world”.
Totally agree with your comments.
As an agronomist relative complains, Australians are simply not informed to vote &/or support environmental ier any evidence based policies because they follow RW MSM, now equipped as delivery system to promote disinformation, for the spread of misinformation via the powerful personal ‘word of mouth’; not fit for purpose, but that’s by design….
As a longtime fatalist in these posts, I am totally convinced the planet and populace are doomed. The Powers that be know it, and have surrendered to the inevitable.
The only slim chance is that somehow the Scientists can come up with something to delay or solve the problem.
They could come up with the atomic bomb in a very short time during a war. Given the same expenditure and a unity of encouragement perhaps they could produce a miracle.