Is there a place for Geography in a ‘post-truth’ world?

by Lewis Wells

“Meeting the needs of today’s population without compromising the needs of future generations”

One would think it would be easier to do, or at least work towards, than ever before. May that be through our technological advancements, encouragements and creations of geographical leaders in areas from Agriculture to the facilitation of active communities, our scope of involvement in the development of our world has accelerated in our effort, execution and thus progress.

But we’ve hit an unusually abstract stumbling block.

Notice the emphasis upon “we”, because it seems not only as if this so-called phenomenon has been able to impact a great number of people, it has been provoked by us both intentionally and unintentionally also. Introducing, the very selection of the Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year for 2016 as “post-truth”. The selection identifies a surge in post-truth behaviour, such conduct. In 2016, the majority of the participating electorate in the United Kingdom made the decision to leave the European Union, a union set up during the 1960s, purposely for trade, emotionally for peace. What since has such a promising-sounding Union become? Such digression is important to consider. However, the focus is on how the decision made was influenced by a plethora of accusations, evidence and information. From the outset, one would assume all information provided is, as it always claims, factual and truthful. But the presence of political favouritism, desperation for victory, but more importantly, the presence of opportunity to manipulate people more easily than ever before, worked to shake this natural conception.

Information was manipulated in unseen manners in order to incite action and participation for the respective “Remain” and “Leave” campaigns- resulting in a country arguably more divided since the Troubles, political uncertainty during the 1970s or even in the wake of the Second World War. Such ‘post-truth’ behaviours during the referendum have left the country reeling

to this precise date. The analysis of content, may that be intentionally manipulative or blatantly incorrect, wages on. We may never know why, or how, some comments came to be

apparent, where they originated from, and to what extent they served an influential purpose.

But they nonetheless did...

The perpetrators have succeeded in conjuring an image of a country tainted by the power of

‘post-truth’- a word defining the state of a population insignificantly moved by facts and

figures — rather emotion, self-belief and what one ‘wishes’ to be correct per less concrete influences. Geography, as the de-facto name for its ideas, the people who work in geographical careers and the organisations that govern geographical decision or policy making, cannot accept blame for such a worrying transitional period, but it can be held accountable for being unable to halt such a transition at its current, dare I say, uncontrollable pace.

It should do more, it must do more, it can do more — Geography is the sole field capable of universally altering the mental direction of populations. I believe it can serve more powerful than instant political change, mathematical and scientific advancement— because Geography is all-encompassing. It is always there, yet not always visible. It therefore needs to be.

  

A secondary case study in the election of Donald Trump as the President of the United States during 2016 re-affirmed the rising appearance of ‘post-truth’ behaviour in more complex, abstract fashions. Firstly, it is of paramount importance to consider the key factor surrounding the triumph of the man, Geographical victory. Populations were led to believe that they were geographically disadvantaged, and would remain to be, in the event of his failure to become elected. The ‘Mid-West’ of the United States, including the ‘Deep South’ saw such a campaign triumph amid campaigning rhetoric consistent of claims of geographical rejuvenation and the removal of obstacles in their vast quantity, should they choose to elect him. They were led to believe that their areas were being deprived of employment opportunity, of large-scale businesses, of attention. In many cases, the former and then current governmental administration’s actions as well as the scene itself confirmed these conceptions. They were not all correct though.

We speak to this day insignificantly of the perhaps lies or fabrications made during those times in the campaign. Why? Well, because such comments made were perhaps not finite, or indefinite, enough. If one took a magnifying glass to each individual manipulation, and then sought to challenge it, one would be counter-challenged with comments such as — “Well, change can’t happen straight away” or perhaps comment detailing that comments made were not geographically decisive, or maybe, that change is already being made, but that others are not paying it enough attention to demonstrate its progress. This suggests that post-truth

can be facilitated easily, with those responsible not directly being held responsible for their actions. That one can re-design the conventional rulebook; speak their mind, in more laissez- faire and unconstrained ways than before.

Such a campaign as that of Donald Trump has led to a rise in geographical division nationally, as has become the case around the world. States feud with other states; counties rescind former ties with other counties. Geography has the obligation to mobilise professional teams, and fight for the development of concepts, in healing this geographical disparagement. Why should a place resent another to the extent of isolation, for mere political difference or out of guilt for another’s access to a natural resource? Geography should take the opportunity to create consultation groups, form bonds between cross-area businesses, to not only preserve unity, but to discredit any controversial comments from politicians or anyone who seeks to extract power and wealth from the incision of hatred or division of others. Through the development of communities, their respective infrastructure, and physical manifestations such

as schools, roads and cityscape buildings, we create opportunities for referral. People have enhanced connections with the ‘thing’ they see every day, the building that influences their family, or friend, or job, which thus generates a sphere of influence. Their lives may better for the creation of geographical projects and they have something to refer to in the event that someone doubts such a positive impact. This delivers a verdict more powerful than what social media, a mere contrasting opinion, or something unverified, could ever achieve.

Geography needs to inspire the next generation to make change. We are constantly led to believe, and there is substantial proof to accompany this, that we are disadvantaged from a young age per our place of residence, local area, family income. The list, unfortunately, goes on. But the teaching of knowledge that this can be changed, over time, will inspire individuals to make the small, but effective, changes that may impact future generations, to ensure they are brought up in more advantaged areas, with more advantageous opportunities. This will enable the presence of resources being allocated to helping people allocate ‘post-truth’ in what they hear, see and interact with. TIME Magazine succeeds in devoting the occasional issue towards “Next Generations’ Leaders”. They are teenagers, young adults, even those of elderly age. They are all fighting in what they believe in, restoring faith in concepts such as globalisation and the desire to provide a better life for those around them. 

On top of that, they are proving the existence of threats to the planet, may that be to endangered species, to life via grave disease, or to the climate. If sceptics were to come into contact with the work of these leaders, they would have more incentive to believe such existence, thus their project, instead of what they are encouraged to believe elsewhere.

Geography has the power to convince people to challenge preconceptions. The teaching of challenging simple or complex comments made online, in the media, or in communities, welcomes a variety of approaches. There need no bias or partiality, from which post-truth predominantly originates. This can be executed with showing younger generations which examples there are already of changes being made in the world, via advancements in engineering to help protect physical landscapes, or developments of medicine, or policy, to help preserve law and order whilst educational development occurs in poorer African nations, for example. By telling younger generations that change is happening, we rule out their thinking that change is non-existent. They will know that they are held back only by what they are told, if they believe that. The analysis of figures, the precise wording in questions, or perplexing comments, will ensue. If a person in the future is told something, they shouldn’t refuse, or deny, the potentiality of such truth in that matter. But they should be prepared to exercise their power to finding that source, breaking it down, and exploring the true meaning, so one is not left so puzzled, leading them to avoid searching for validity and merely accepting that accusation. The objective of Geography is not to overrule other fields making their respective efforts. It is to provide people the opportunity to explore what Geography is doing.

A ‘puzzled’ result is what has led to such accidental duplication and acceleration of post-truth incidents. People are unable to challenge what they are told through this human natured response of acceptance and are then going on to develop that story, or comment, based on only their memory, often adding additional, often false quotes, which merely extends the issue at hand. If an act of crime were to take place within a South African city, time would not be wasted by those facilitating post-truth in developing this story to consist of false facts designed to generate readership and stoke negative feelings towards the city. This acts as a mere example. Lucy Lamble spoke recently in the Global Development podcast in the Guardian, of the challenges disabled children face in Rwanda. How quickly could this then become that children in Rwanda possess a phobia of disabled people”? If such stories were publicised, without prior disclaimer or synopsis of context, a troubling characterisation of a culture or population could take place. Lucy told listeners that Rwandan children are not educated to the extent of recognising that disabled people are disabled — not necessarily that they are made to feel equal, but that they are not presented with a suiting definition such as handicapped or disabled persons. Their teachers are not trained to approach others differently. Thus, the children are often unsure how to behave around them, and derogative

behaviour risks originating.

Geography can act as the antidote, as it is already starting to do. Lucy Lamble and her team have succeeded in identifying a problem in a country, and they are revealing that problem so that others can interact. By visiting places across the world, disrupting the norm, and

advancing conditions in progressive ways, people are exposed to the work of geography at hand. The exposure to geographical problems and the subsequent resolve of them provides

people case studies, for which they can refer to, when similar situations arise elsewhere. How was that solved? How could that have been or be manipulated or represented unfairly? How was Geography utilised to prevent such an escalation? How can we rely on Geography to help diagnose the next potential area at risk in our “post-truth” world?

There will always be a place for Geography in our world, regardless of the threats we face. We have overcome global conflict, epidemics, sizable transfer of governance. We are entering a world where people are significantly struggling to challenge what they are told, to the extent that they are refraining to do so. Geography, as in the people of every geographical career, is in a prime position to manufacture real solutions and convey these as real factual examples. This must be considered this as the next goal. Only then will

Geography be able to halt or backtrack our acceleration into a post-truth world.