Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
I disagree but respect your perspective.
Extinction Rebellion
- Thread starter Mrs.Anteater
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
Ritafee
Is Being Human
A group of environmental activists is planning to try and shut down some of Canada's busiest bridges on Monday October 7th by having protesters lie down in traffic lanes.
The group's targets include the Angus L. Macdonald Bridge over Halifax Harbour, the Burrard Street bridge in Vancouver and the Prince Edward Viaduct in Toronto.
A Nova Scotia organizer for the group Extinction Rebellion says the planned acts of civil disobedience aim to show the public that major disruptions are inevitable if society fails to act on climate change.
The group's targets include the Angus L. Macdonald Bridge over Halifax Harbour, the Burrard Street bridge in Vancouver and the Prince Edward Viaduct in Toronto.
A Nova Scotia organizer for the group Extinction Rebellion says the planned acts of civil disobedience aim to show the public that major disruptions are inevitable if society fails to act on climate change.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
Emphasizing what most of us already know about climate change...
First, it’s the greatest threat to human civilization ever, as far as we can tell.
Second, it’s not an external threat but something we are doing to ourselves.
Third, our collective response remains very far from adequate.
Climate breakdown is only part of a much larger eco-crisis.
We cannot blame the degradation of nature simply on increases of carbon.
We must address our long-standing degradation of the natural world in all its forms.
Humanity has been exploiting the natural world for most of its existence.
Today, however, business as usual has become a threat to our very survival.
This extinction events is one caused by the activity of one particular species: us.
The crisis of nature is, at heart, a crisis of civilization.
Our collective preoccupation with never-ending economic growth.
Meaningless production and consumerism.
Take a look at one particularly revealing example: Bluefin Tuna.
The Japanese love sashimi, and their favorite variety is bluefin tuna.
Unfortunately, bluefin tuna is also one of the world’s most endangered fish.
Mitsubishi conglomerate, a large corporate empire, has an ingenious response:
Corner close to half the world market by buying up as many bluefin tuna as it can.
As the worldwide population plummets toward extinction.
The tuna are imported and frozen at -60°C in Mitsubishi’s massive freezers.
They will command astronomical prices when bluefin tuna go extinct.
As tuna fleets try to satisfy an insatiable demand—primarily Mitsubishi’s.
From an ecological standpoint, this response is immoral, obscene.
From a narrow economic standpoint, however, it’s quite logical, even clever.
Because the fewer bluefin tuna in the ocean ...
The more valuable Mitsubishi’s frozen stock becomes.
That is the nature of economic competition for corporations like Mitsubishi.
Encouraged or “forced” by : if you don’t do it, someone else probably will.
That’s how the “tragedy of the commons” plays out on a global scale.
The example above is one of many that point to a fundamental perversity built into economic systems motivated by profit, which tend to devalue the natural world into a means, subordinated to the goal of expanding the economy in order to maximize profits.
This focus often overshadows our appreciation of the natural world, which means that we end up destroying real wealth—a flourishing biosphere with healthy forests and topsoil, oceans full of marine life, and so on—in order to increase numbers in the bank accounts.
As the enormous gap between rich and poor continues to widen worldwide, most of that increase goes into a very small number of accounts.
Such perverse logic ensures that sooner or later our collective focus on endless growth—on ever-increasing production and consumption, which requires ever more exploitation of our natural resources—must inevitably run up against the limits of the planet, and it just so happens that’s happening now.
We consider ourselves and others to be separate entities, pursuing our own well-being at the cost of theirs in ways that the eco-crisis repudiates.
As earth-dwellers, we’re all in this together.
When China burns coal, that pollution doesn’t just stay above Chinese skies.
Nor does nuclear radioactivity from Fukushima stay only in Japanese coastal waters.
The same is true generally for humankind and the rest of the natural world:
When the ecosystems of the earth become sick, we become sick.
What the earth seems to be telling us is Wake up or get out of the way.
Facing seemingly intractable political and economic systems, we could easily despair.
Where to start?
Those who control our current economy and political systems also profit the most from them (in the narrow sense), so they tend to be little inclined to make the systemic changes necessary—and are often incapable of doing so.
We can see that institutional change can only come from the grassroots, and signs are growing that more and more people are fed up with waiting for economic and political elites to take action.
But while the necessary response has begun, it’s easy to overlook what’s happening, because the mainstream media are not interested in publicizing or encouraging that transformation.
Six megacorporations now control 90 percent of the media in the United States, and they make their profits not from informing us but from advertising.
Their perspective inevitably tends to normalize consumerism, including the political system that aids and abets it.
Unsurprisingly, they promote “green consumerism” as the solution to the eco-crisis—personal lifestyle changes such as buying hybrid or electric cars, installing solar panels, eating locally, and so on.
However, even if many of us do everything we can to reduce our individual carbon footprints, “the trajectory of our climate horror stays about the same.”
Most problematic are economic and political structures ...
Institutionalized greed, is deeply implicated in the eco-crisis.
First, it’s the greatest threat to human civilization ever, as far as we can tell.
Second, it’s not an external threat but something we are doing to ourselves.
Third, our collective response remains very far from adequate.
Climate breakdown is only part of a much larger eco-crisis.
We cannot blame the degradation of nature simply on increases of carbon.
We must address our long-standing degradation of the natural world in all its forms.
Humanity has been exploiting the natural world for most of its existence.
Today, however, business as usual has become a threat to our very survival.
This extinction events is one caused by the activity of one particular species: us.
The crisis of nature is, at heart, a crisis of civilization.
Our collective preoccupation with never-ending economic growth.
Meaningless production and consumerism.
Take a look at one particularly revealing example: Bluefin Tuna.
The Japanese love sashimi, and their favorite variety is bluefin tuna.
Unfortunately, bluefin tuna is also one of the world’s most endangered fish.
Mitsubishi conglomerate, a large corporate empire, has an ingenious response:
Corner close to half the world market by buying up as many bluefin tuna as it can.
As the worldwide population plummets toward extinction.
The tuna are imported and frozen at -60°C in Mitsubishi’s massive freezers.
They will command astronomical prices when bluefin tuna go extinct.
As tuna fleets try to satisfy an insatiable demand—primarily Mitsubishi’s.
From an ecological standpoint, this response is immoral, obscene.
From a narrow economic standpoint, however, it’s quite logical, even clever.
Because the fewer bluefin tuna in the ocean ...
The more valuable Mitsubishi’s frozen stock becomes.
That is the nature of economic competition for corporations like Mitsubishi.
Encouraged or “forced” by : if you don’t do it, someone else probably will.
That’s how the “tragedy of the commons” plays out on a global scale.
The example above is one of many that point to a fundamental perversity built into economic systems motivated by profit, which tend to devalue the natural world into a means, subordinated to the goal of expanding the economy in order to maximize profits.
This focus often overshadows our appreciation of the natural world, which means that we end up destroying real wealth—a flourishing biosphere with healthy forests and topsoil, oceans full of marine life, and so on—in order to increase numbers in the bank accounts.
As the enormous gap between rich and poor continues to widen worldwide, most of that increase goes into a very small number of accounts.
Such perverse logic ensures that sooner or later our collective focus on endless growth—on ever-increasing production and consumption, which requires ever more exploitation of our natural resources—must inevitably run up against the limits of the planet, and it just so happens that’s happening now.
We consider ourselves and others to be separate entities, pursuing our own well-being at the cost of theirs in ways that the eco-crisis repudiates.
As earth-dwellers, we’re all in this together.
When China burns coal, that pollution doesn’t just stay above Chinese skies.
Nor does nuclear radioactivity from Fukushima stay only in Japanese coastal waters.
The same is true generally for humankind and the rest of the natural world:
When the ecosystems of the earth become sick, we become sick.
What the earth seems to be telling us is Wake up or get out of the way.
Facing seemingly intractable political and economic systems, we could easily despair.
Where to start?
Those who control our current economy and political systems also profit the most from them (in the narrow sense), so they tend to be little inclined to make the systemic changes necessary—and are often incapable of doing so.
We can see that institutional change can only come from the grassroots, and signs are growing that more and more people are fed up with waiting for economic and political elites to take action.
But while the necessary response has begun, it’s easy to overlook what’s happening, because the mainstream media are not interested in publicizing or encouraging that transformation.
Six megacorporations now control 90 percent of the media in the United States, and they make their profits not from informing us but from advertising.
Their perspective inevitably tends to normalize consumerism, including the political system that aids and abets it.
Unsurprisingly, they promote “green consumerism” as the solution to the eco-crisis—personal lifestyle changes such as buying hybrid or electric cars, installing solar panels, eating locally, and so on.
However, even if many of us do everything we can to reduce our individual carbon footprints, “the trajectory of our climate horror stays about the same.”
Most problematic are economic and political structures ...
Institutionalized greed, is deeply implicated in the eco-crisis.
Mrs.Anteater
Just keep going....
I am not sure if I blocking traffic a useful tool to make people more aware. Most people will just be annoyed and it could just turn people against the movement. Not sure how the law is in Canada, but I listened to an interesting point on Berlin Radio about German law:
The right to assemble publicly trumps the individual right of the drivers once there is such a large group, that blocking travel is unavoidable. I.e. if there are three people sitting on the street, they can get charged if they don’t clear the street, but if 100 000 show up, the police actually has to protect them and ensure they don’t get run over and their right to assemble is higher than the right of the traffic. Even if the demonstration is spontaneous.
The right to assemble publicly trumps the individual right of the drivers once there is such a large group, that blocking travel is unavoidable. I.e. if there are three people sitting on the street, they can get charged if they don’t clear the street, but if 100 000 show up, the police actually has to protect them and ensure they don’t get run over and their right to assemble is higher than the right of the traffic. Even if the demonstration is spontaneous.
Mrs.Anteater
Just keep going....
That is the value of democracy.
Laws of supply and demand .... why intelligence is a rare commodity ... people would rather not think ahead! Intelligence could be valuable in the future ... relatively speaking so as to support Einstein's followers of the Big Fallacy of Relativity ... when so many declare nothing is relative ... especially in survival ... thus the death wish as cultured by a host! This ... even if they say they mean respect .... but if you read into wit ... IT is odd and strange ... something to learn!
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
Wow, finally, someone on the left comes up with a plan. Now you just need agreement. By the way this is not a new plan, but at least the left is starting to put forth solutions.
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
Moses figured it out.
Mrs.Anteater
Just keep going....
PG13, I noticed that you like to find all kinds of irony youtube videos. Could you please start your own thread with that, because it is getting a bit too much on this one as this is not the intention of this thread. I don’t feel that it contributes positively in any way to this discussion.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
@Pontifex Geronimo 13
Can you deny that damage has been done to our ecosystem by people for profit?
This is where my own interest in XR is vested.
The challenge now is the same perennial challenge which comes up every single time there is a massive and enthusiastic push from the public in a direction that is healthy:
Such movements always, without exception, become targeted for manipulation by establishment interests.
This corralling of healthy energy into the advancement of corrupt establishment interests happens with feminism, it happens with the healthy fight against racism, and of course it happens with environmentalism.
We know that our oligarchic empires will do literally anything, up to and including murdering a million Iraqis, to secure control over energy resources.
We know this with absolute certainty.
Therefore we can also know with certainty that they are working to ensure that when new energy systems are put in place, they are put in place in a way which allows the oligarchs to retain their power, and ideally to expand it, without losing their thrones to rival plutocrats, to governments, or (worst case scenario) to the rank-and-file public gaining control over their own energy.
There’s a very clear demand we can add into the mix in this new push for environmentalist reforms which runs directly counter to the interests of the empire that is trying to manipulate our healthy impulses: de-fund the Pentagon.
There is no single, unified entity that is a larger polluter than America’s dishonestly labeled “Department of Defense”.
Its yearly carbon output alone dwarfs that of entire first-world nations like Sweden and Portugal; if the US military were its own country it would rank 47th among emitters of greenhouse gasses, meaning it’s a worse polluter than over 140 entire nations.
That’s completely separate from the pollution already produced by the US itself.
None of the sociopathic corporations whose environmental impact is being rightly criticized today come anywhere remotely close to that of the Pentagon.
US military’s ecological toxicity: “Producing more hazardous waste than the five largest US chemical companies combined, the US Department of Defense has left its toxic legacy throughout the world in the form of depleted uranium, oil, jet fuel, pesticides, defoliants like Agent Orange and lead, among others.”
The US “has conducted more nuclear weapons tests than all other nations combined”,
US military interventionism in Iraq “has resulted in the desertification of 90 percent of Iraqi territory, crippling the country’s agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80 percent of its food,”
“US military bases, both domestic and foreign, consistently rank among some of the most polluted places in the world.”
Surely with all this talk about the huge, sweeping changes that are required to avert climate catastrophe we’re not going to overlook the world’s single worst polluter just because a few think tankers and their plutocratic sponsors believe it’s important for the US-centralized power alliance to retain total global hegemony?
If we’re making huge, sweeping changes, the completely needless globe-spanning US war machine would be the obvious place to start.
That’s something we can inject into the mainstream dialogue as this environmental movement grows, and the cool thing about it is that the establishment manipulators can’t reject it or they’ll expose themselves.
It’s something we can demand that they can’t legitimately say no to.
We can surf this clear, concrete, exciting and utterly indisputable idea on the surging momentum of these climate demonstrations, and the same healthy impulse to save our planet that these budding activists are now embodying will lift it right up and carry it to the top of mainstream awareness.
No sane person will reject this, so if anyone pushes back against it to say “No, not that,” they’ll immediately spotlight the insane agendas they serve.
Certainly the hundreds of environmentally toxic military bases circling our planet, exists solely for the benefit of murderous dominating imperialists and sociopathic war profiteers.
Demanding a reversal of US military expansionism as a part of the environmental movement is sane on its face and will benefit everyone.
www.wakingtimes.com
Can you deny that damage has been done to our ecosystem by people for profit?
This is where my own interest in XR is vested.
The challenge now is the same perennial challenge which comes up every single time there is a massive and enthusiastic push from the public in a direction that is healthy:
Such movements always, without exception, become targeted for manipulation by establishment interests.
This corralling of healthy energy into the advancement of corrupt establishment interests happens with feminism, it happens with the healthy fight against racism, and of course it happens with environmentalism.
We know that our oligarchic empires will do literally anything, up to and including murdering a million Iraqis, to secure control over energy resources.
We know this with absolute certainty.
Therefore we can also know with certainty that they are working to ensure that when new energy systems are put in place, they are put in place in a way which allows the oligarchs to retain their power, and ideally to expand it, without losing their thrones to rival plutocrats, to governments, or (worst case scenario) to the rank-and-file public gaining control over their own energy.
There’s a very clear demand we can add into the mix in this new push for environmentalist reforms which runs directly counter to the interests of the empire that is trying to manipulate our healthy impulses: de-fund the Pentagon.
There is no single, unified entity that is a larger polluter than America’s dishonestly labeled “Department of Defense”.
Its yearly carbon output alone dwarfs that of entire first-world nations like Sweden and Portugal; if the US military were its own country it would rank 47th among emitters of greenhouse gasses, meaning it’s a worse polluter than over 140 entire nations.
That’s completely separate from the pollution already produced by the US itself.
None of the sociopathic corporations whose environmental impact is being rightly criticized today come anywhere remotely close to that of the Pentagon.
US military’s ecological toxicity: “Producing more hazardous waste than the five largest US chemical companies combined, the US Department of Defense has left its toxic legacy throughout the world in the form of depleted uranium, oil, jet fuel, pesticides, defoliants like Agent Orange and lead, among others.”
The US “has conducted more nuclear weapons tests than all other nations combined”,
US military interventionism in Iraq “has resulted in the desertification of 90 percent of Iraqi territory, crippling the country’s agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80 percent of its food,”
“US military bases, both domestic and foreign, consistently rank among some of the most polluted places in the world.”
Surely with all this talk about the huge, sweeping changes that are required to avert climate catastrophe we’re not going to overlook the world’s single worst polluter just because a few think tankers and their plutocratic sponsors believe it’s important for the US-centralized power alliance to retain total global hegemony?
If we’re making huge, sweeping changes, the completely needless globe-spanning US war machine would be the obvious place to start.
That’s something we can inject into the mainstream dialogue as this environmental movement grows, and the cool thing about it is that the establishment manipulators can’t reject it or they’ll expose themselves.
It’s something we can demand that they can’t legitimately say no to.
We can surf this clear, concrete, exciting and utterly indisputable idea on the surging momentum of these climate demonstrations, and the same healthy impulse to save our planet that these budding activists are now embodying will lift it right up and carry it to the top of mainstream awareness.
No sane person will reject this, so if anyone pushes back against it to say “No, not that,” they’ll immediately spotlight the insane agendas they serve.
Certainly the hundreds of environmentally toxic military bases circling our planet, exists solely for the benefit of murderous dominating imperialists and sociopathic war profiteers.
Demanding a reversal of US military expansionism as a part of the environmental movement is sane on its face and will benefit everyone.
Want To Save The Environment? De-Fund The Pentagon.
Caitlin Johnstone - Millions of people are uniting in demonstrations worldwide against our civilization’s ecocidal march toward extinction, which makes me so happy to see.
www.wakingtimes.com
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
I am trying to bring reality into the discussion. The left brings up absurd ideas and I am only pointing out what it would look like to take their ideas to their logical conclusion. Most of my life was in the energy sector. I know what miners think about the environment. There are trade offs. Use of fossil fuels has drawbacks, but the left only focuses on the negative. The benefits are never taken into account. David Suzuki in the 70’s said that all the earth’s resources would be mined out by the mid 80’s and showed a picture of a starving little boy in a hut with a tiny fire and one pot. Like that was my future. There is no shortage of resources. There is no climate crisis. Look out the window. David Suzuki has a huge carbon footprint. The “Powers that be” are trying to frighten you into wanting them to take total control of your lives. You will not like that. It is like the left want to be hamsters in a cage run by a non elected entity that is promising to give you a terrible existence.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
I agree ... and that is why the powers that be need to be reminded by the people that we are on to them. Whether you like it or not ... the environmental crisis is not made up. I have no real idea as to what would have happened as far a climate change without people but to deny that we have polluted our environment and that we are killing life on this planet for profit just does not make any sense. Yes your property sounds like a veritable garden of eden ... mine is pretty nice as well. That does not change the fact that toxic industrial waste is destroying much of the land, water and air on this planet ... in neighborhoods near you. There are people in Alberta that are not faring as well as you are ... to deny that mining pollution does not exist ... one has to be delusional ... trying to deflect with 'we have to eat the babies' ... nonsense and you know it.
Aren't the oil companies and the mining companies and the plastic manufacturers, etc. , and all the connected companies that rely on their products for profit... Are they not the non-elected entities promising us something while the planet burns @Pontifex Geronimo 13 ? We're all hamsters in their cage. Or, maybe canaries is a better metaphor.
Pontifex Geronimo 13
#walkaway
Pollution and climate change are not the same thing. Carbon dioxide is not pollution. Carbon dioxide is not the driver of climate. It reacts to temperature change.
I live in Calgary, zone 3. Plants that are zone 4 do not survive in Calgary. Our growing season has not changed in my lifetime. You need extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims.
stop blaming other people for what you consume. You buy it because it is better than not buying it. You heat your home because it is preferable to freezing to death. These are your decisions.
I work for profit. That is not a bad thing. I then pay someone to supply gas to my house because I see value in comfort and health and non frozen pipes. Nobody makes me buy gas.
I live in Calgary, zone 3. Plants that are zone 4 do not survive in Calgary. Our growing season has not changed in my lifetime. You need extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims.
stop blaming other people for what you consume. You buy it because it is better than not buying it. You heat your home because it is preferable to freezing to death. These are your decisions.
I work for profit. That is not a bad thing. I then pay someone to supply gas to my house because I see value in comfort and health and non frozen pipes. Nobody makes me buy gas.
They're big bullies who've cornered the market so there are no other options. And their lobbies pay huge money to obfuscate the narrative rendering climate change vs no climate change some sort of "optional" belief system so that it hasn't been taken seriously enough - while they've profited - for decades. Talk about "gaslighting". They're the ones caging us in.
Yes, unfortunately, we need oil and gas as the transitions are made but they need to be made sooner not later.
Last edited:
How Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Used “Astroturf” Front Groups to Confuse the Public
The top lobbyist for the fossil fuel industry in the western United States secretly ran more than a dozen front groups in an attempt to undermine forward-looking policy on climate change and clean technologies.