As a young political scientist it is important for me to remind myself that it is easy to be political. The trouble is you do not even have to try to be political. To paraphrase Aristotle, I am human, I am inherently political.

I hate when people say that something is political when talking within the realm of politics. Of course it is political, it is politics. It is the nature of the beast.

To expand on this introduction, I believe it is important to remember to keep an open mind and be the “devil’s advocate” as often as possible, particularly when you run into ideas that you already agree with.

This weekend, I have been in Washington D.C., learning about climate change activism in preparation for some lobbying I will do in front of the U.S. Congress this Tuesday. I believe that climate change is a real issue, and that it is an issue that deserves and requires our attention on a national scale.

However, I do not think that I am in agreeance with the idea that climate change is in the top three most important issues in the world today. Numerous speakers at the Spring Lobby Weekend I am attending have purported this.

So you must be wondering if I am just here to tell you, and convince you of, my top three issues? No.

I am here to discuss how our experiences lead us to our most concerning issues. Not just us as individuals, but on state and national issues, along with our stance on international issues.

What do we know? Who did we hear that from? And how has that been incorporated with our current, personal lexicon?

For example, let us take the state of California. Let me list off a few things I know about California.

California has recently been identified as having the seventh largest economy in the entire world. California is one the most polluted states in the U.S., if not the most polluted. California has some of the most stringent environmental policies in the U.S. today. It is important to note that these policies were implemented by the state government, not the federal government. Lastly, there are more people currently living in California than there are living in Canada.

So to give you something to chew on: What is a result of what? Why is California so polluted? Why do they have some of the most stringent policies in the entirety of the U.S.?

It is my assumption that the large population of California has led to their booming economy and that economic production led to the state’s environmental degradation.

So why do people in California adhere to such stringent political policies? They see, firsthand, the environmental degradation. They are directly affected, therefore they act.

At this Spring Lobby Weekend, it was purported that the main image of climate change in the U.S. is polar bears. Who in the U.S. genuinely cares about polar bears?

With this I just mean to say that if climate change activists want Americans to care about what they are advocating for, they need a new image. The face of climate change in the U.S. cannot be a bear from the Arctic.

Not all Americans can see environmental degradation like Californians. Not all Americans want to advocate for climate change like Californians.

And I think that this is okay.

Politics is very evolutionary and it takes time, pending custom. Evolutionary politics is a great way to look at climate change. When humans actually start to care enough, it is going to be when they can see the environmental degradation hitting close to home.

I am not saying to not advocate for something, I am just saying you only care to advocate for causes that hit close to home.