As Canada seeks to effectively confront the climate crisis and transition off of fossil fuels, much can be learned from the urgency and ingenuity displayed during the Second World War. As it happens, I’ve spent the last year and a half researching this very connection for my forthcoming book A Good War: Mobilizing Canada for the Climate Emergency. But life is full of curve-balls. Just as my book was going into production, the world was struck by a pandemic crisis that pushed the climate emergency, for now at least, off the front burner.
I chose to frame my book around Canada’s Second World War experience because I sought an historic reminder of how quickly we’ve transformed society and our economy in the past. As I write, however, we’ve all been witness and party to such evidence in real time. Suddenly, everyone is drawing comparisons to the Second World War, and our leaders have been immersed in a crash course in wartime economic planning as they seek guidance for confronting the pandemic.
Similarities abound between our wartime experience and the current pandemic response. In contrast to our lackadaisical climate plans, today we’re seeing what an emergency response looks and feels like, particularly when the emergency catches us off-guard.
The status quo is suspended. Government leaders and public officials hold daily emergency briefings. Emergency Acts are invoked. Federal and provincial cabinets form emergency response committees of key ministers. Resources and personnel are redeployed. Manufacturing capacity is requisitioned to produce essential products. Governments assume the power to direct necessary supply chains. Public facilities are repurposed as needed. We honour the front-line people making extraordinary sacrifices, most of whom are lower-wage workers whose labour we so often devalue.
As in the Second World War, the news media and journalists have risen to the occasion, quickly retooling their kitchen tables to continue providing vital public information and rally our collective morale from their homes. In a welcome shift from what has marked climate reporting, the media — with some notable exceptions — seem to feel no obligation to give credence or space to those who question the scientific evidence. And while society’s defenders of civil liberties rightly urge caution and vigilance in the allowance of governmental emergency measures, informed in part by our wartime history, we are on the whole prepared to abide reasonable intrusions in the interests of public health, provided democratic oversight is maintained.
The evolving governmental response to the pandemic in Canada has been, by and large, impressive and bold. Our governments have shown themselves willing and able to pivot to emergency mode with laudable speed and flexibility. We’ve seen a level of cooperation across confederation and partisan lines unprecedented in modern times. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, almost all premiers, government ministers and countless municipal and Indigenous community leaders have shown real leadership thus far.
As occurred in the Second World War, our governments at every level have appropriately dispensed with the fetishization of balanced budgets and are spending what is required. Between the audacious Canada Emergency Response Benefit, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, boosts to the Canada Child Benefit and the GST credit, and various loans and aid to businesses, total direct government spending on the crisis is approaching $200 billion. The design of these programs has been imperfect, but the federal government has not allowed such details to derail swift action.
As with the climate crisis, those society has most marginalized are hit hardest. Consequently, we’ve witnessed a new-found collective willingness to house the homeless (commandeering hotel rooms) and to offer income support to those who can’t work, so that people can properly shelter in place for the benefit of all. In numerous provinces, evictions have been banned and rents frozen (albeit temporarily). The federal government is boosting Canada’s international aid, despite our heightened domestic demands, given the global nature of the pandemic.
The emergency response to protect the most vulnerable has been far from perfect — the desperation of Canada’s poorest communities has only heightened, Canada has turned asylum-seekers away at the border and support for migrant workers within Canada has been weak. COVID-19 has revealed and exacerbated all the existing inequities in our economy. It has laid bare the interconnections of the crises we face — the inequality crisis, poverty and homelessness, the opioid crisis, the rise of employment precarity, and the ecological crises. Yet now we seem prepared to at least recognize and begin to repair these interlocking fissures.
Just as social solidarity was vital for wartime mobilization, so it has been in this crisis. And our displays of such solidarity have been beautiful. Yes, just like in the war, the early days were marked by a minority of people who responded in selfish or panicky ways, engaging in anti-social behaviour — hoarding, attempted profiteering or willfully ignoring public health appeals to keep physical distance. And as in the war, anti-Asian racism rears its ugly head. But this time, our governments have denounced, rather than incited, such behaviour.
As Rebecca Solnit recounts and predicts in her book A Paradise Built in Hell, the large majority of us have shown our best selves. We have heeded the instructions of public health officials, done our best to protect the vulnerable, organized “mutual aid” networks and looked out for and delivered food to our house-bound neighbours. We emerged from our homes each evening to bang pots in thanks to health care and other essential workers. We’ve stayed calm and done our best to educate and entertain our children. We’ve cooperated.
As in the war, this pandemic has forced a change in our daily household and employment routines and practices. After rigidly insisting for years that people must commute into work and meet in-person, employers and employees have quickly discovered the potential (and even the benefits) of tele-commuting and video-conferencing. Even parliamentary committees, city council meetings and other governmental decision-making have moved to virtual platforms, and the prime minister himself has worked and held meetings and media briefings from home.
And, of course, everything but the most essential domestic air travel has come to an abrupt halt. A welcome side-effect of all these COVID-19 crisis adjustments has been that GHG emissions and harmful air pollution in Canada and globally have dropped (but in the absence of other actions, this will only be a temporary effect).
As our governments spend billions beyond what they originally budgeted and as the economy heads into a deep recession, 2020 will see a large spike in Canadian government debt-to-GDP. Yet this jump is perfectly manageable. Our government debt levels are historically low, leaving Canada well-placed to weather this storm. And with much of this new debt being owed to the Bank of Canada, which throughout the COVID-19 crisis has been mass purchasing government bonds on a weekly basis, our public finances can withstand this crisis just fine.
Indeed, with investors spooked and looking for a safe harbour, now is the perfect time to launch an ambitious public “Victory” bond drive like we did during the war. Let’s invite the public to contribute to an economic recovery plan. And with interest rates at an historic low, our governments at all levels should be borrowing like never before to finance the climate and social infrastructure investments now urgently needed.
Overall, while the economic situation may feel chaotic and ominous, in real economic terms the spending now underway merely shows what we could have done in response to the climate emergency, poverty and homelessness all along.
All of this represents proof positive that, given the will, we’re indeed capable of rapidly rising to the climate challenge. The curse of the climate crisis is that it moves in slow motion in comparison to the pandemic and the war, and has thus failed to sufficiently galvanize us so far.
There’s a key difference between the wartime and climate crises, on the one hand, and the coronavirus pandemic on the other. The war effort and climate mobilization demand that we get out and build what was/is required for the transition, while the pandemic has obliged us to stay home. Consequently, whereas the war and climate action were and can be a boost to the economy and job creation, the COVID-19 crisis represents a massive hit to both. The fact that climate action is a positive on these fronts, however, is welcome news; just as the Second World War ended the Great Depression, as we rebuild from this pandemic, an ambitious climate plan with massive green infrastructure spending can be just what the doctor ordered.
The vital and urgent challenge now is to ensure that, as we emerge from the coronavirus crisis, we use this experience and the opening it creates to catapult our societies into the post-carbon economy. As writer Arundhati Roy urges, this pandemic should be seen as “a portal, a gateway between one world and the next.” We must not return to yesterday’s normal, with all its inequalities and fossil fuel reliance.
This pandemic has the potential to dramatically jump-start our efforts to decarbonize — to accomplish massive emission reductions in a few short years. But this is not assured. On the contrary, we’re certain to see a great battle over what the return to post-COVID “normal” looks like. The new climate denialists in industry and government are already seeking huge public bailouts for the fossil fuel sector, airlines, traditional auto manufacturing and more. Will we seek to quickly restore the main industries of before, or will we embrace the massive government expenditures any rebuilding efforts will inevitably require to permanently re-make our economies?
Another vital difference between the COVID-19 and climate emergencies is the degree to which they catch us unprepared. Our governments have not yet seen fit to adopt a wartime-scale response that preemptively tackles the climate crisis. We mobilize to put fires out, not to prevent them. But climate change-induced disasters and disruptions in growing frequency and severity are coming. We’re going to be pressed into service one way or another, and our character tested. The only question is whether we’ll be mobilized exclusively in moments of disaster not of our choosing — as we have been in this pandemic — or assume agency and mobilize preemptively on our own terms?
The global and Canadian pandemic story is still unfolding. The full extent of the crisis to both human health and the economy remains unknown. Our Second World War story, however, is known, and the speed and scale of what we accomplished was stunning. A clear conclusion from all these crises, past and present, is that humans are amazingly resilient and capable of accomplishing great things with remarkable rapidity when required.
The COVID-19 pandemic has reaffirmed the role and value of ambitious government action. It has reminded us of our mutual reliance. Social solidarity and support for public services is likely at a generational high. There is a new spirit of national cooperation in the land upon which we must now capitalize. The economy now urgently requires public investment to rebuild from the pandemic. Combine all these new realities, and the time has never been more opportune for true climate emergency mobilization.
Quick question: do you think the article you just read would be published elsewhere?
Odds are that it would never run in Canada's corporate media. That's why we're asking you to be a part of building a real, left alternative to corporate media — so that more people are exposed to viewpoints and ideas like this one.
But without your support, it's an impossible task. We depend 100% on readers like you becoming members to pay writers and fund our operations. We don't take money from wealthy backers and we don't run ads.Become a member