chp4: add sunita narain as e.g. of green minority epistemology

1 files changed, 15 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/chapter4.md b/chapter4.md
index 3951a01..9921128 100644
--- a/chapter4.md
+++ b/chapter4.md
@@ -166,6 +166,21 @@ containing dutch elm disease rather than blanket poisoning, had to go against
 the advice of the chemical companies, the universities, and the US Department
 of Agriculture. \[CITE\]
 
+More recently, Sunita Narain, a veteran of India's environmental regulator, the
+Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), has written about the CSE's attempts
+to regulate air pollution, junk food, greenhouse gas emissions, protection of
+wildlife, and waste management, among other issues. Interests fought them in the
+courts, in the legislative process, and in the public square.
+
+> The fact is that every issue is contested because of conflicts of interest. It
+> is contested because it is the contest of ideas and the contest of realities.
+> To engage in this contest requires research and an ability to stand against
+> the stated truth—or what I have called the established fact. \[…\] We had to
+> fight the 'established' science of diesel in our fight for clean air; the
+> 'established' science of pesticides in our work on toxins and food safety; the
+> 'established' science of conservation in our effort to bring a new way to
+> manage wildlife so that people also benefit. [@conflicts-of-interest, pp. x-xi]
+
 If rhetors today want to persuade their audiences to support a Green New Deal,
 they're going to have to fight the majority epistemology, held firmly in place
 by fossil interests. To do that, they'll need to exploit minority cognition,