用“自然规律”掩盖结构性谋杀Masking Structural Murder as 'Natural Law'
Pedro Sánchez 说的“气候变化会杀人”是一个简单的直接暴力 (direct violence) 描述，但西班牙右翼政党 PP 和 Vox 的反应则揭示了更深层的文化暴力 (cultural violence)。当他们试图用“地球历史上气候一直在变”这种伪科学叙事来稀释危机时，他们实际上是在夺取解释权，试图将一场由工业文明和资本贪婪驱动的结构性灾难，重新定义为一种不可抗力的“自然现象”。
这种叙事武器化的本质是：只要将气候危机定义为“自然波动”，那么政府在灾难应对中的失职、对农村基础设施的长期抛弃，以及对生态系统毁灭的冷漠，就都可以被合理化为“面对不可控自然力的无奈”。这就是典型的元暴力 (meta violence) 运作——通过垄断对“事实”的定义，让结构性暴力看起来像是不幸的意外。
最讽刺的共谋 (complicity) 发生在权力内部。右翼政客一边在灾难发生时享受三小时的漫长午餐，一边在社交媒体上用伪造的文件挑战气象局的数据。他们并不在乎温度是否真的达到过 44 度，他们在乎的是通过制造“认知噪音”，让公众在碎片化的争论中忘记追究谁在为这些死亡负责。当“气候紧急状态”被贴上“共产主义议程”或“游说集团阴谋”的标签时，真实的受害者——那些在高温下崩溃的环卫工和被火海吞噬的工人——就成了被抹除的客体。
这场存在性战争的博弈点不在于温度计的读数，而在于谁能定义“死亡的性质”。是自然的筛选，还是权力的谋杀？只要这种“自然规律”的叙事还能在公共空间获得生存空间，那么每一次山火和洪水，都将成为权力者掩盖自身无能与残忍的绝佳掩体。
Pedro Sánchez’s claim that “climate change kills” is a straightforward description of direct violence. However, the reactions from Spain’s PP and Vox reveal a deeper layer of cultural violence. By attempting to dilute the crisis with the pseudo-scientific narrative that “climate has always changed,” they are seizing the right of interpretation, attempting to redefine a structural disaster driven by industrial civilization and capital greed as an inevitable “natural phenomenon.”
The essence of this weaponized expression is simple: as long as the climate crisis is defined as a “natural fluctuation,” the government's failure in disaster response, the long-term abandonment of rural infrastructure, and indifference to ecological collapse can be rationalized as “helplessness against uncontrollable nature.” This is a classic operation of meta violence—using the monopoly over the definition of “fact” to make structural violence appear as a mere unfortunate accident.
The most cynical complicity occurs within the power structure. Right-wing politicians enjoy three-hour lunches while people drown, then pivot to social media to challenge meteorological data with forged documents. They don’t care if the temperature actually hit 44 degrees; they care about creating “cognitive noise” to ensure the public forgets to hold them accountable. When the “climate emergency” is labeled as a “communist agenda” or a “lobbyist conspiracy,” the actual victims—the street-sweepers collapsing in the heat and workers swallowed by flames—become erased objects.
This existential war is not about thermometer readings, but about who defines the “nature of death.” Is it natural selection, or is it murder by power? As long as this “natural law” narrative survives in the public sphere, every wildfire and flood will serve as a perfect bunker for the powerful to hide their incompetence and cruelty.