London Climate Protests

[Marky-Mark]

The destruction of the natural world is not the result of global capitalism, industrialisation, “Western civilisation” or any flaw in human institutions. It is a consequence of the evolutionary success of an exceptionally rapacious primate. Throughout all of history and prehistory, human advance has coincided with ecological devastation. — John Gray, STRAW DOGS

The reason this ^^ is painfully true is because avoiding ecological systems collapse would require change on a scale so massive that only after collapse had begun would humans even bother to consider such change given their ability for denial and opposing political agendas.

 

[vuk]

The destruction of the natural world is not the result of global capitalism, industrialisation, “Western civilisation” or any flaw in human institutions. It is a consequence of the evolutionary success of an exceptionally rapacious primate. Throughout all of history and prehistory, human advance has coincided with ecological devastation. — John Gray, STRAW DOGS

The reason this ^^ is painfully true is because avoiding ecological systems collapse would require change on a scale so massive that only after collapse had begun would humans even bother to consider such change given their ability for denial and opposing political agendas.

although i admire the literary qualities, alternatively, one could say/argue that the repulsive and destructive global capitalism we have right now is the result of the most exceptionally rapacious primates in our midst.

 

[Cav]

As a lifetime socialist and Trade Union member, there are some things that collective action can achieve in a particular environment.

In this case there is no chance that protesters will achieve anything in terms of substantive change.

I applaud their efforts.

 

[Marky-Mark]

although i admire the literary qualities, alternatively, one could say/argue that the repulsive and destructive global capitalism we have right now is the result of the most exceptionally rapacious primates in our midst.

Very true. Humans sit atop the food chain because of their success at growing themselves, which in the end is simply entropy. Anyway, the best economic model so far for rapid growth is global capitalism. And we've succeeded so completely with it that we are well into overshoot, as would be expected. Growing and not overshooting our planet's carrying capacity is the problem.

 

[Joe P]

Capitalism clearly plays a part in unsustainable consumption of resources and energy.

Just think, a multi-billion dollar industry exists solely to persuade you to buy stuff you may not even had known existed from other multi-billion dollar industries.

Joe

 

[Tony L]

well, aside from a couple of luxury shaving brushes and some expensive hi-fi, mainly purchased second-hand many years ago, i live a fairly frugal life. i use a bicycle for 95% of transportation and have never owned a car (i used to rent them occasionally). i use less than half the heat + electricity my neighbour (in exactly same house) does and have set up a basement office for summer use to eliminate the need for air-conditioning. i have also chosen not to have children (though mainly out of fear for their future) and am firmly opposed to religions that promote procreation.

I assume you are now totally vegetarian or vegan? If not that will make far more difference.

 

[dweezil]

Capitalism clearly plays a part in unsustainable consumption of resources and energy.

Just think, a multi-billion dollar industry exists solely to persuade you to buy stuff you may not even had known existed from other multi-billion dollar industries.

Joe

Government exists to rein in the most perverse and unintended consequences of capitalism. I've always thought one of the most depressing aspects of my years studying economics was that there were only two lectures contemplating Steady State. The rest was predicated on eternal, unlimited expansion; as a maths based course entrant I spotted the folly of that concept.

 

[Hook]

yet, in all this time, i have never heard you mention international political interference in the past, nor have i heard you or anyone else comment on the ongoing US attempt to overthrow the government in venezuala. it very hard to believe that you really care about the concept in a general sense. chomsky has cared about and documented it all his life, which puts him in a position of expert authority to comment on the trump matter and dismiss it as relatively trivial, even laughable.

Yet another selective editing of one of my posts by you. There is nothing laughable about the help Russia gave Trump during the election, and there is nothing laughable about what he has done as President to hurt the environment.

Now to your off-topic point. Are you really suggesting that because I don't comment on everything, that I shouldn't comment on anything?

As far the general concept of one nation interfering in the politics of another, I do not have an absolute opinion. In general I am opposed to it, but I think it can be morally justified in certain extreme circumstances. For example, when attempting to prevent large numbers of innocent people from being killed by a brutal dictator, or being starved to death through government corruption and incompetency. I do not believe in cultural relativism, or in those who use the concept to justify inaction in very desperate times.

And, just for the record, I do not care whether you believe me or not.

 

[wyjsar]

Emma Thompson has been talking about the Extinction Rebellion demos, which she completely supports. She has flown back to England to do so and says this is to ensure a future for her children and grandchildren.

Thompson climbed on board the pink boat moored at Oxford Circus and said, according to the BBC: "We are here in this little island of sanity and it makes me so happy to be able to join you all and to add my voice to the young people here who have inspired a whole new movement." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47987891

The Mail think the police have used Thompson as bait to lure in protestors, but then they would. According to the newspaper the police formed "a ring of steel" around the boat as the actress read "a love poem to the Earth." When she finished they began arresting people.

In a different interview Thompson talked about what a hypocrite Cameron is. He went to Europe in 2016 to sign a bill concerning climate change, then came back to England and ratified 200 fracking proposals.

Thompson says hypocrisy in the government about climate change is unbelievable.

Jack

When does she fly back to LA? What is the eco equivalent of a champagne socialist I wonder...?

 

[jackbarron]

When does she fly back to LA? What is the eco equivalent of a champagne socialist I wonder...?

There was a great interview with Emma Thompson on Channel 4 News. It was put to her that flying over from LA to take part in a climate change demo was hypocritical.

Thompson argued she has campaigned about green issues. aviation and climate change, for several decades and has for the most part been ignored. During this period successive governments have promised to do something substantial and haven't. To her they are the hypocrites.

Dame Emma Thompson is a very annoyed woman and completely distrustful of the British government. I kind of like that about her.

Jack

 

[Joe]

Who gets to decide that it's OK to tear down a rain forest? You? Me? No, somebody with loads of money who stands to make loads more by their crime against humanity! Some things are patently and irrefutably wrong.
.

The obvious is obvious. After all every Miss World claimed that one of their ambitions was 'world peace'

It's when you leave the obvious and head towards the ( someones ? ) margins that I was asking about. Who then decides where the line is?

BTW ...I want to buy my mum and dad a nice house, end world hunger and bring about world peace if anyone is asking.

 

[russel]

My dog is carbon neutral.

Why do you think that?

 

[russel]

Capitalism clearly plays a part in unsustainable consumption of resources and energy.

Just think, a multi-billion dollar industry exists solely to persuade you to buy stuff you may not even had known existed from other multi-billion dollar industries.

Joe

Yes, I find it amazing that advertising executives are lauded for getting people to buy stuff they do not need with money they do not have.

 

[Joe]

There was a great interview with Emma Thompson on Channel 4 News. It was put to her that flying over from LA to take part in a climate change demo was hypocritical.

Reminds me of the time Vanessa Redgrave was on the news during a public protest in London about the 'plight' of there refugees in Calais. She was literally in tears at the conditions they had to put up with, as she saw it. The reporter asked "surely you could home a few in you Hamstead home ? " ..'Oh no ! 'she replied..'they wouldn't like my house, it's much too untidy'.

 

[Joe P]

Russel,

Any idea what annual worldwide advertising expenses are? I don’t but I bet it’s more than what’s spent on all climate change research.

Edit: I did a search. Apparently, more than half a trillion US clams.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/236943/global-advertising-spending/

Corr blimey, that’s like a defense budget! No wonder we buy so much crap we don’t need.

Joe

 

[MikeMA]

Why do you think that?

I've done the math. We could all take a leaf out of Tinkerbell's book.

 

[TheDecameron]

The destruction of the natural world is not the result of global capitalism, industrialisation, “Western civilisation” or any flaw in human institutions. It is a consequence of the evolutionary success of an exceptionally rapacious primate. Throughout all of history and prehistory, human advance has coincided with ecological devastation. — John Gray, STRAW DOGS

The reason this ^^ is painfully true is because avoiding ecological systems collapse would require change on a scale so massive that only after collapse had begun would humans even bother to consider such change given their ability for denial and opposing political agendas.

Do you believe we are beyond the point of self-restraint?

 

[ff1d1l]

 

[Marky-Mark]

Do you believe we are beyond the point of self-restraint?

I really don't think there's much we could do now. Hopefully that's wrong, but I see nothing on the horizon and the latest from the arctic is 2.5c heating per decade from today until ... it's not good! To me, collapse doesn't seem all that strange anymore, you know? It's like it's a destiny we can't help but fulfill due to our nature and circumstance. Some like to call it the Great Filter, and as such use it as an explanation for why there's no contact from other intelligent life in the vast universe. And that's because they would've found and exploited a plentiful and relatively easily extractable energy source that wound up destroying their environment as we have. And so that's the filter: growth without self-destruction.

It's all pretty boggling. But when you put it in the context of evolution and history and our insane level of population and technical growth that's come arm in arm with fossil fuels, it begins to seem more like a natural consequence than a sci-fi nightmare. I mean, we overindulge with so much. Hi-fi, for instance. Thoughtless consumption on every level of modern human existence ... why not extinction through the same process on a huge scale?

 

[Mullardman]

The obvious is obvious. After all every Miss World claimed that one of their ambitions was 'world peace'

It's when you leave the obvious and head towards the ( someones ? ) margins that I was asking about. Who then decides where the line is?

BTW ...I want to buy my mum and dad a nice house, end world hunger and bring about world peace if anyone is asking.

Yebbut.. do you look really tasty in a bikini?