moves flannery chp2 -> chp3

1 files changed, 28 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
index 03d7720..f5ea78f 100644
--- a/chapter3.md
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -1,11 +1,33 @@
 ## Chapter 3
 
-In this chapter, I will aim to show that these criticisms would, if they were
-applied to the Apocalypse of St John as it was addressed to its original
-audience, fail to reflect the radical possibilities of that work. Then, in
-chapter 4, I will aim to show that green rhetors even now must make use of those
-radical possibilities of apocalyptic language in order to be politically
-effective, and suggest some ways how they might do that.
+In the previous chapter, I explored how contemporary green rhetors use
+catastrophic language, and three reasons why some commentators believe
+that this is counter-productive.  Given the close relationship between
+catastrophe and apocalypse in the imaginations of many people in the West, this
+begs the question of whether green rhetors ought also to avoid apocalyptic
+language.  Frances Flannery, Professor Emerita of Religion at James Madison
+University, has argued just this.
+
+Flannery emphasises that in popular imagination, 'apocalypse' signifies nothing
+more than the end of the world, ignoring the world-creating aspects of biblical
+apocalypses [@flannery-2024, p. 209]. This may be a legacy of Cold-War era
+nuclear rhetoric and science fiction, which re-purposed the symbol 'apocalypse'
+to describe the consequences of a nuclear war, while deliberately stripping the
+disaster of any redemptive afterward [@wojcik-end-of-the-world, p. 1]. Thus, she
+argues, the result of raising the threat of a 'climate apocalypse' is to 'create
+passivity rather than spur on quick and cooperative climate action' and to inspire
+mass climate anxiety. Such a fatalist narrative can also imply that human action
+is irrelevant, or encourage audiences to put their hope in 'savior figures such
+as inventors, scientists, or governments who might rescue humanity in the nick
+of time.' [@flannery-2024, p. 210]
+
+Flannery's critique would imply that green rhetors ought to avoid apocalyptic
+language. This conclusion rests on two key premises: one, that apocalyptic
+language is catastrophic in the same way which leads to fatalism, conservatism
+and post-politics as described above; and two, that catastrophe is the dominant
+effective symbol associated with apocalyptic language. In the next chapter, I
+will argue against both of these premises, using the Apocalypse of St John as
+a model of apocalyptic language.
 
 The first thing to notice is that, while the first three criticisms enumerated
 above all assume that apocalyptic language is catastrophic, the Apocalypse