“Wer zu spät kommt, den bestraft das Leben.” [Whoever arrives late is punished by life]. Former President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev supposedly said this to East German leader Erich Honecker after the pompous fortieth  anniversary celebrations of the communist German Democratic Republic in October 1989. 

Less than a month later, the Berlin Wall had fallen, and less than a year later, East Germany had disappeared into the unified Federal Republic of Germany. Shortly thereafter, Honecker himself fled to the Chilean embassy in Moscow to escape prosecution. He died in Chilean exile in 1994. 

As we are celebrating the 25th anniversary of German unification this year I am reminded again and again of that period that so dramatically changed Germany and eventually the entire map of Europe.  The rapidity of that change took everybody by surprise, but it is still baffling to me today that Honecker and his government, with a far more extensive secret police apparatus at their command than the Nazis, would be so ignorant of their own swiftly approaching doom. To me, there is only one explanation: they simply lacked the imagination.

 Again today, we find ourselves in a moment where imagination is in surprisingly short supply. Many of those in power are unable or unwilling to imagine the different future that could already be around the corner. We are desperately attempting to cling to a fossil fuel-powered economy when the alternatives are already available. This lack of imagination is particularly painful in view of the overwhelming evidence that climate scientists have painstakingly assembled over decades about upcoming climate disruptions. In fact, the 2014 “Climate Change Synthesis Report,” published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, found that following the pre-industrial age, economic and population growth have contributed to the emission of greenhouse gases and are “extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of global warming since the mid-20th century.” And it is even more painful in view of the fact that these disruptions are affecting the poorest communities first.  

It is also, as it was 25 years ago, very much a generational problem; while the 77-year-old Honecker still had the illusion he could send tanks to Leipzig to stop everything just as the Soviets had done in Prague in 1968, the young people poured out into the streets of East Germany in ever-growing numbers throughout October 1989, demonstrating peacefully after prayer services in churches every Monday, reminding their leaders “We are the people!” It was the older generation that could not imagine a different future. Their children certainly could.

Societies cannot afford to make the same mistake today because so much more is at stake. We must change our economies just as dramatically and swiftly as Germany did 25 years ago. 

We must replace fossil fuels with wind and solar energy wherever possible. We must reduce our greenhouse gas emissions wherever we can.  And we must stop trying to profit from the fossil fuel industry. The technology for this switch is available and affordable. 

Delaying it will decrease the cost dramatically by an estimated $1.8 trillion by 2040,  as a recent study by Citibank confirms. Just imagine a discussion with your children’s great-grandchildren, who will be living with the consequences of our actions.  

We cannot afford to ignore the young people who are gathering in the streets and here on campus and on campuses around the world, demanding that we pay attention to their right for a future, demanding fossil fuel divestment. 

We cannot afford to ignore the obvious signs — such as when Exxon Mobil and other fossil fuel companies are being investigated for deceiving their investors and the public about the risks of climate change or when the Rockefeller family believes it is unwise to stay invested in fossil fuel stocks or when large religious congregations collectively decide to take their money out of an industry that wrecks the planet. Are we really going to say “but we need those profits?” Are we really that short of imagination?

Some argue that Brandeis can simply not afford to divest from fossil fuels. But investment also has to do with imagining the future. Anyone with an interest in long-term financial health and our students’ future must consider the risk of a carbon bubble. The oil price slump has already cost oil-producing countries trillions. 

As Pope Francis beautifully argues in his Encyclical Laudato Si, climate change is the social justice issue of our time, and there is good reason to believe that some form of carbon pricing will eventually become a necessity. Many have shown that a prudent approach to fossil fuel divestment does not negatively affect a portfolio’s long-term performance. 

It is hard to imagine today that even after the Berlin Wall fell, German unification was initially not high on anybody’s agenda — neither in nor around Germany. The signs of a new era only become obvious in retrospect. The global fossil fuel divestment movement has grown so fast in part because more and more people are beginning to realize that in order to protect a habitable planet, the fossil fuel era must come to an end. If we are serious about social justice, Brandeis must do all it can to reduce its carbon footprint, and it must divest its endowment from fossil fuels now so it can become the leader it claims to be. Just imagine! 

—Sabine von Mering is Professor of German and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies and the Director of the Center for German and European Studies. She is also a co-founder of Faculty Against the Climate Threat (FACT).