I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…

I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…

What they probably mean is “remove planes from the future!” Which is fair enough. I think they should be replaced by space elevators.

That’s one thing it seems very hard to get right on the ‘net – because when posting relatively anonymously to relatively anonymous strangers, it’s far too easy to jump down people’s throats, or get all worked up and end up ranting.

I’ve finally begun to recognize this in myself – not that I’m immune to it yet – but I really want to stop being such a ranter, and try to always post in a positive, encouraging, non-preachy way.

This isn’t entirely for altruistic reasons though! I almost certainly spend too long posting in various places on the ‘net and would like to make my posting more productive, in that I wish to express myself better and without alienating people (who I’d hope to persuade to agree with me) in the process.

I have decided (as of coming back from Climate Camp) to make this a personal resolution of mine, though only time will tell.

Cheers, anyway.

Dave S:

I think that I misjudged you earlier. Judging by your latest post, you sound like a decent sort of chap, and I fully support your efforts to set an example by living in a ‘green’ way. It is also good to see that you reject the sort of eco-authoritarianism that filters through to us via the media. I apologise for any rudness on my part.

As for the police vs. protestors, I think that protestors are always portrayed as the victims of police brutality, but it is often more complicated than that.

I hope they’re taking action against the police on this!

Your comment about ministers and officials is definitely true, and unfortunately tars all of us environmental types with the same dirty brush. Personally, I can’t stand their immense hypocrisy any more than you can, and I think they’re doing a tremendous disservice both to the environmental causes they pretend to care about, and to the taxpayers they are ripping off. They are a huge part of the problem and deserve to be shunned, which is why things like the Climate Camp are such important places to demonstrate other options for dealing with climate change away from the non-”solutions” offered (or usually not offered) by government.

Dr. Mayer Hillman’s talk at the camp was pretty contentious. He proposed some rather unpopular solutions – basically that we needed heavy government enforcement around green issues, particularly carbon rationing, and that nothing short of this would save us.

Although a few in attendance agreed with him (this was to be expected – the camp was open to anyone, and there were many different political backgrounds present), many people including myself spoke out and harshly condemned eco-authoritarianism and government-based solutions. In fact, someone even stood up at the end of the talk as people were leaving and said that they didn’t believe what had been said was in line with the spirit of the climate camp.

For the most part, people at the camp do not want an eco-fascist state! That’s why instead of calling for the government to ingrain itself in every aspect of our lives and babysit us like irresponsible children, we used the DIY approach and organised without leaders to create our own solutions.

By-and-large (with notable exceptions, who I would expect to be harshly criticised and ultimately excluded), you can expect us to continue to use this approach in future, and reject anyone who thinks they can tell others what to do. Climate Camp is not about telling people what to do – it’s about coming together to work out what we can do together.

We (including me) often get this part wrong, but instead of criticising others and telling them what not to do, we instead need to create positive alternatives and lead by example. I’m trying to do this and succeeding relatively well – though I will always aspire to do much more.

Some of the people coming to the camp would undoubtedly have been on planes recently, but it is through meeting others and learning that we realise our own hypocrisy and improve ourselves. The true mistake is to be confronted with ourselves and learn nothing from it.

Regarding the police, there is now quite a bit of video footage where the police can clearly be seen to be beating the living crap out of peaceful protesters.

In fact, one of my friends (a man in his mid-50s, who was doing nothing more than standing there) was knocked flying onto the edge of the kerb, and has broken his hip in two places. I was also speaking to an older lady (mid to late 60s) who was punched in the front and the back by riot cops.

There was no provocation by protesters, and even in the face of a serious beating by riot cops (many of whom wore no numbers, so were essentially masked up, tooled up, anonymous thugs), many did not even raise a fist back. Undoubtedly there was some pushing and shoving, but ask yourself what you would do if your peaceful protest was set upon by armed people intent on hitting you with weapons?

Not that I expect a bunch of ultraviolent cops beating up entirely peaceful protesters is going to change anybody’s minds, despite any amount of video footage.

Is it really so far beyond consideration that riot cops turning up and hitting people is what starts riots? In the face of such a vicious and unprovoked beating, I’m pleasantly surprised that there really was no violent lashback from protesters.

In any case, could any number of people deciding to protest outside an office, or chain themselves to a gate, or superglue themselves to a door ever be grounds for vanloads of armed cops using any amount of violence?

The police violence is impossible to justify, and I think in the coming months we are likely to see quite a few cops (at least those who can be identified because they weren’t illegally operating without numbers) losing their jobs and maybe even facing prosecution as a result.

Unfortunately, it is a fact that many who were the most violent were completely unidentifiable and anonymous (including those who jumped on me as I walked down a residential street, breaking their van door in the process), so will go on again to abuse their position of power to assault more non-violent, concerned members of the public.

I hope you never get to personally find out what this feels like, because it’s really unpleasant.

To answer your later point about seeing climate change conquered – nothing would make me happier, as I could finally get on with the rest of my life! But we certainly aren’t going to see it fixed by governments or corporations, and we also aren’t going to see it fixed by technology without the accompanying significant changes in society, and the way we live our lives.

Still, I don’t think this is going to be as painful as I guess you probably suspect it is going to be! There is a simple beauty in such things as growing your own food, creating your own energy or building your own energy-efficient house – and even better when done as a social activity with other people.

Ultimately, the types of social changes that are by-and-large suggested by people at the Climate Camp are the kind of things that really are going to give us more freedom, unshackle us from corporations and governments who want to profit from our dependence on them, and really will make our lives vastly more fun and rewarding.

The future – at least the one I imagine – is largely a happy place, full of excitement and creative possibilities. From adversity comes opportunity, and there’s going to be plenty of that!

OK, quantity-wise we’ll have a little bit less stuff, but the quality of our lives will be vastly improved from where we are now. We’ll finally be able to reach our full potential as humans, because we can be so much more than tiny cogs in the machines of huge companies!

This is not a cloud-cuckoo-land dream, but a very real, achievable goal. It’s certainly a far more realistic possibility than infinite consumerism in a finite world.

I really look forward to seeing you there, and finding out what you come up with yourself!

Hell, yes. Willy covered all the bases. Try Lear:

Thou rascal beadle,hold thy bloody hand!

Why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thy own back;

Thou hotly lusts to use her in that kind

For which thou whip’st her. (IV, vi 157-60)

Quite a bit of Macbeth, (‘look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under it’, ‘There is no art to find the mind’s construction in the face) Hamlet (…smile and smile and be a villain.’) and passim.

Rumbold @ 25 – that may be hypocrisy but why is it bad?

I want to get a feel for why it is viewed as bad, not a definition of hypocrisy.

The whole drug taking debate and how politians are forced to deny smoking cannabis is full of hypocrisy and really does skew what should be a rational debate and response. My concern is about the way “hypocrisy” is used by the media to manipulate and divert public discussion away from rational debate by appealling to our emotions and not our minds. I always think of “Hypocrisy” as a very emotional response that clouds our minds to the real debate and arguements.

Does the theme of ‘hypocrisy’ turn up in Shakespear. I ask – because I always think of ‘hypocrisy’ only being able to live in a world where things are expected to be fair. I don’t think in Shakespears era, fairness in society was a concept that existed so does he dwell on ‘hypocrisy’ – I would be interested to know.

Justforfun

… like I said, this is not similar to what the media and politicians do daily. But you still buy/listen to them?

If someone wishes to reduce their ‘carbon footprint’ and does so in some areas, but not in others, that is not hypocrisy. That is a realistic scenario. The hypocrisy arrives when said person goes to a demo and starts yelling at others to change their ways and cut out x, y, and z, even when said person has only cut out x and y.

Wilde.

Is hypocrisy morally wrong, or is it like inflation, where a little bit of inflation is good for the economy but too much ruins everthing.

Has hypocrisy anything to do with morals?

Is a little hypocrisy needed in all of us to make life work , but too much and people will never know where you stand. Is hypocrisy the flip side of integrity?

Is hypocrisy ever a virtue? Is a lot of hypocrisy required to “succeed” in life and especially in politics?

Justforfun

You show me a person without contradiction and I’ll show you a robot. We all have contradictions in how we want to behave and how we end up behaving. Environmentalists are no different. But I bet you they care a lot more for social justice and positive social values than the hacks who have been cynically laying into them all week. And you guys buy into that stupid narrative. Shame.