“Tit for Tat for the Earth”
the Rev. Bruce Russell-Jayne, October 14,2007

Dateline Oslo, 12 October 2007, The Norwegian Nobel Institute announces:
“The Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore Jr. for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about [hu]man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.

Indications of changes in the earth's future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness, and with the precautionary principle uppermost in our minds. Extensive climate changes may alter and threaten the living conditions of much of [hu]mankind…There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states…
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of [hu]mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond [hu]man control.”
:::
Wow, some really good environmental news for a change! And, what timing for a sermon on global warming, talk about synchronicity. Due to his celebrity status, Gore’s book and movie, An Inconvenient Truth, brought widespread concern for the environment. Thanks to him more and more people are paying attention to the issues. The world owes him a debt of gratitude for his efforts to increase knowledge of global warming and climate change. Let’s give Gore his due and hope his ideas take hold in the political arena, but we need to listen to scientists, too, as we begin to craft specific actions to combat the deleterious effects of human impact on the environment. The climate needs all the help from science it can get. Schellnhuber’s 12 tipping points are important tools for teaching what is actually happening to the earth.

We need to pay attention to the data and analysis most accepted by the scientific community, not to the spin of those with political agendas. For example, we have known about the hole in earth’s ozone layer above Antarctica since 1985. When scientists told us chlorofluorocarbons destroy ozone in the stratosphere most countries signed the Montreal Protocol which began banning ozone-depleting chemicals. After a few years, we all breathed a sigh of relief. It seemed we had taken action and averted disaster. The earth could pat itself on the back.

Yet, in 2007, 20 years after this international effort began, there is still a hole over the Antarctic, a newer dimple over the Arctic, and a general thinning of the ozone is under way everywhere else on earth. “In June 2006 researchers from NASA, NOAA, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research announced findings that the hole will take 20 more years than previously predicted—that is, until 2018—to begin significant healing. This is partly the result of … climate change slowing ozone repair. Schellnhuber calls the ozone hole the mother of all tipping points since it tips even as we declare victory.”

I hate to burst everyone’s bubble on that one. And really, I shouldn’t. We did a good and right thing, our efforts were partially successful, and it is still necessary to keep the ban on CFCs. However, we now need to graduate to the next level of environmentalism. At the graduate level we realize one action, such as banning CFCs, cannot alone save the planet. The 12 Tipping Points are where we learn more about our complicated global climate systems, where we try to understand their interrelations and where we accept solutions to climate change have to be comprehensive and on a global scale.
:::
I know exhorting Unitarian Universalists to be environmentalists is like “preaching to the choir,” and you are all the choir. Most of us have taken some action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and we wish our society would wake up and do more. But, we are, so far, part of only a small minority in America. According to a 2005 study of risk perception, most Americans were moderately concerned about global warming, but fully two-thirds “believed the greatest threats are to people far away or to non-human nature. Only 13 percent perceived any real risk to themselves, their families, or their communities.” At the other end of the spectrum were those who perceive climate change as a very low or nonexistent danger. We might wonder how these naysayers, who represent only 7 percent of Americans have so much influence on our government.

Even the most well-intentioned of us often feel helpless in the face of what feels like a relentless barrage of global calamities. The news of Katrina, the Occupation of Iraq, tsunamis and melting glaciers, and on and on. It wears us down, and we respond by circling the wagons and focusing on our own more manageable problems. “The end result is that [many] people practice denial, which appears in the culture at large as indifference.”

If indifference and misconceptions continue, Americans won’t marshal resources to prevent the tipping of global climate systems. The good news is in the last two years an ever larger number of Americans are becoming more concerned for the environment. As we heard in her article, Julia Whitty is optimistic we can hasten the 13th tipping point which would be signaled when a majority of people let go of denial about global warming and start making collective efforts to stop it.
:::
Whitty believes human beings have the capacity for working together to change behaviors which are destructive to our environment. She bases her belief in the possibility of our survival on discoveries coming out of game theory about human nature. Game theory is one tool we use to analyze human social behavior. For decades, game theory has tested situations in which people demonstrate reciprocal altruism. Recently, it has been suggesting possible ways the human inclination toward altruism can be coordinated on a large scale for the benefit of our entire culture.

The best known game is Prisoner's Dilemma, in which two players individually choose whether or not to cooperate. The Prisoner's Dilemma is created by this scenario:
Two suspects are arrested by the police who have insufficient evidence for a conviction. Each is offered the same deal: if one testifies for the prosecution against the other and the other remains silent, the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both stay silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose without knowing what the other has done.

The first time people play the game, both prisoners almost always betray each other. However, if allowed to play several times, players learn to cooperate. They almost inevitably learn a strategy that has been named “Tit for Tat.” To use Tit for Tat, a player starts by cooperating. In succeeding rounds she responds in kind to the other prisoner’s previous action. Soon, they both cooperate all the time. This is an example of altruistic behavior which also turns out to be in our best interests – or vice versa. In ethical terms we would say they are acting in accordance with the Golden Rule.

However, we don’t all play by the same rules. How do we decide which strategy to use for interacting with other people? We all know how to answer this question because we all play games. The first rule of game playing is, 'watch the other players.' Your best game strategy often depends upon the strategies adopted by others. This is exactly what Tit for Tat does. In 1981 Tit for Tat first won a world-wide computer competition for the best winning strategy for The Prisoner’s Dilemma, and it has continued to win such competitions against almost all comers ever since. People who study cooperative behavior now recognize Tit for Tat as one of the dominant strategies adopted by evolutionarily successful societies of both animals and humans. We’ve understood for a long time that cooperating with each other is good for us as individuals, and as a society.

Lew, our illustrious nonegenerian, has asked me to talk about why people are good. What is it about human beings that gets us to be good to others? Well, the only answer I have so far is, “We are good because we choose to be good.” We choose altruism, acting for the good of others, in most cases because we believe helping others will be good for us, our offspring or our society in the long run. An additional benefit of helping other people is they respond with feelings of friendship that may lead them to return a favor. Altruistic acts may very well turn potential enemies into friends. Recent research on what motivates people to protect the environment suggests people are more likely to take positive actions when they know more about the science of climate change and when other people see them doing so. It seems we are inclined to behave better as citizens when we are educated and when our actions are visible to others. So we choose to be good because its good for us, and we do it more often when others see us doing it. The lesson for environmentalists is we should let those who are reluctant know we are willing to act in cooperation, to work together to solve global warming, our common problem.
:::
I may very well have witnessed an example of this in the business meetings of the 2006 General Assembly, the annual June meeting of the Unitarian Universalist Association. One of the main items of business was to finalize wording on a “Statement of Conscience” on the "Threat of Global Warming/Climate Change." Creating a Statement of Conscience, (or SOC) is a multi-year process which includes several opportunities for congregations to give input. I encourage Northern Hills Fellowship to become more involved in this important social justice work. Ask me how later.

The 2006 Statement of Conscience began:
“Earth is our home. We are part of this world and its destiny is our own. Life on this planet will be gravely affected unless we embrace new practices, ethics, and values to guide our lives on a warming planet. As Unitarian Universalists, how can our faith inform our actions to remedy and mitigate global warming/climate change? We declare by this Statement of Conscience that we will not acquiesce to the ongoing degradation and destruction of life that human actions are leaving to our children and grandchildren. We as Unitarian Universalists are called to join with others to halt practices that fuel global warming/climate change, to instigate sustainable alternatives, and to mitigate the impending effects of global warming/climate change with just and ethical responses. As a people of faith, we commit to a renewed reverence for life and respect for the interdependent web of all existence.”

Well, this sounds pretty good, pretty UU, right? When the draft SOC that had been prepared earlier by the Commission on Social Witness came to the floor for debate, there were people lined up at the mikes - both the “Pro” and “Con,” and there was a list of over 50 proposed amendments to it. Those in favor of the SOC stated that it was time for us to act since global warming is a true problem caused by humans, and therefore needed to be addressed by us. Some of the amendments expressed concern about the disproportionate impact of global warming on developing nations and the poor in this nation. But what were speakers at the Con mike going to say? To my surprise and relief, instead of giving arguments against the science or proposals for action, they spoke of the need for stronger wording than that already contained in the SOC! What ensued was several more hours of enlivened discussion amongst a few thousand UUs which could have ended in ensnaring the whole SOC in procedural wrangling and delaying it’s approval by another year. Have you ever known UUs to get bogged down in discussion and not get to the action part? Well, that didn’t happen at this GA. It didn’t because we went into a “Committee of the Whole” in order to move quickly thru the amendments and to take a sense of the whole group which resulted in an overwhelming vote to greatly strengthen the SOC and move on it in a timely manner. Hooray! We did it!

Now, good UUs – go read the SOC on the UUA website on the Commission for Social Witness page. It contains sections on the science of climate change, moral and ethical reasons why we should work to mitigate it, and lists of actions individuals, churches and the larger community should take to help reduce the impact of this global dilemma. So, GA was uplifting for me, because I saw UU democracy take action on a most important issue in a way which has made our strong opinion heard. I was so very proud to have been part of a process in which UUs cooperated on a grand scale.
:::
If we have handled our world poorly, we can change about and treat it well. Schellnhuber tells us why and Gore tells us what to do. We know how to do it. If UUs have learned to cooperate with each other, we ought to be able to do it with anyone, right? It is time to get motivated and do something now about global climate change. Each of us individually can go home and screw in some of those funny looking light bulbs. After you do that, invite your friends over and show them your example of doing something for the environment. When our neighbors see we do our part for the environment, they are much more likely to pitch in.

Then we need to get others on board, those who have been left out of the environmental movement such as many poor folks and people of color. “Until recently, being Green meant being White. A new initiative called 1 Sky hopes to unite a broad array of groups focusing on climate change into a national movement…1 Sky is reaching out not only to environmental groups, but to labor, community development, Latino, African American and green business organizations… It is asking governments to help create 5 million what it calls “Green-collar” jobs, to help spread the benefits of the green energy revolution to all parts of society.” A group working with 1 Sky called Step It Up is mobilizing students in all fifty states. It was founded by Bill McKibben, “who in 1989 published the first important book on global warming, The End of Nature.” They plan demonstrations all across the country on November 3rd, one year before the election. Watch for them; join them.

Now is the time for us to work together and bring the majority of Americans into a climate movement that is capable of restoring the delicate balance between humankind and the rest of nature. Let’s use Tit for Tat to bring about cooperation between all people and a spirit of unity in the goal of saving the earth.

So might this be.
Amen