North of 2

138 comments on “North of 2 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

   1 February 2015 at 2:18 pm

   Pleading self defence?
2. marty mars 2

   1 February 2015 at 2:44 pm

   There is no magic savior – technology or aliens.

   We are being lied to continuously.

   Some people will never accept the truth.

   There is no political will to make the changes that could mitigate our ability to respond to the climate changes occurring.

   Even with the political will, most people won’t give up anything if it means adjusting their lifestyle.

   what to do – well i posted a jmg article about “downshifting our technological infrastructure to roughly 1950 – you said “My first reaction is to go in the opposite(?) direction.”
   http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-30012015/#comment-959689
   The reality is that no country addicted to the gods of progress is going to even entertain going back – even if it makes sense and is practically the only thing a country could do.

   what to do – if the country won’t do it we will have to do it ourselves, although I’d be aiming for earlier than 1950 personally. imo it is about the only thing we can do – it will give us the best chance of riding the slide, it will build personal resilience, responsibility, priorities and community.

   what to do – we need a movement dedicated to revitalising the old skills, the old ways of doing things based upon our lives today – I am interested in trying to build this, if you (whoever reads this) are email me.

   what to do – I posted another jmg post about talking to those who went through WW2, read the accounts of what happened to ordinary people during WW1 and the depressions.

   what to do – front up and destroy illusions of it can’t happen, it won’t happen, we don’t deserve it to happen, I don’t want it to happen, something will stop it happening, I refuse to believe it is already happening – and start making preparations, start planning and start learning – plus build community and trust/love with those you care about.

   what to do – if you aren’t happy with your personal situation/where you live/what you do – make changes quickly, while you can before you can’t.
   • Bill 2.1

     1 February 2015 at 2:56 pm

     The thing is Marty, that you or I making radical changes isn’t really going to have much effect on the global situation. It isn’t you or I who are significant contributors to AGW. (Yes, we do do stuff that would be better not done and I’m not saying we should carry on blithely).

     But I believe the best we can hope for is to disable the main culprits – the 5 – 10% of the human population who are responsible for a huge chunk of emissions.

     How to do that? Well a general labour and debt strike would do it. How to get the necessary numbers garnered to pull off such a thing? Well, blowing the gaff on the lies being fed to us (happy 2 degree possibilities) would be a bloody good start imo.
     • marty mars 2.1.1

       1 February 2015 at 3:08 pm

       Yep I suppose I’m saying that energy spent on trying to change stuff that can’t or won’t be changed is a waste of energy.

       but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be screaming their lies as loud as possible for all to hear so keep it up and if there is a strike or three I’ll be there in support and solidarity.
     • Colonial Rawshark 2.1.2

       1 February 2015 at 3:16 pm

       BTW rebuilding middle class incomes and greatly improving income inequality will all lead to much higher economic consumption.

       The classic goals of the Left to raise living standards for all also pumps CO2 into the atmosphere.

       The thing is Marty, that you or I making radical changes isn’t really going to have much effect on the global situation

       I think one of the most effective things we can do politically is to force Labour to accept the reality of near term fossil fuel depletion and extreme climate change.

       BTW the World Bank sees 4 deg C temperature rise as a credible scenario.
       • weka 2.1.2.1

         1 February 2015 at 3:21 pm

         “I think one of the most effective things we can do politically is to force Labour to accept the reality of near term fossil fuel depletion and extreme climate change.”

         Ideas on how to do that?
         • Paul 2.1.2.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 5:56 pm

           Vote Green
           • weka 2.1.2.1.1.1

             1 February 2015 at 6:50 pm

             yes, that’s one good way, but I’d hazard a guess it wasn’t what CV was thinking.
             • Paul …

               1 February 2015 at 7:06 pm

               Yes and cv is not going to effect change from a party that believes In economic growth.
               • weka …

                 1 February 2015 at 7:16 pm

                 I remain hopeful of CV’s ability to effect change where he is 🙂
               • marty mars …

                 1 February 2015 at 7:35 pm

                 the Greens believe in economic growth don’t they?
                 • Paul …

                   1 February 2015 at 7:38 pm

                   Sadly, you are right, I think. The Greens certainly aren’t perfect, but they are the best on offer in NZ to deal with climate change unless one sets up a new party.
                   In reality, the most progress is made by organisations and people out of parliament.
                 • Robert Atack …

                   2 February 2015 at 10:46 am

                   The greens are 100% behind growth.
                   What with Norman wanting an inquiry into the loss of manufacturing jobs (as if closing planet fucking factories was a bad thing?) to printing money which finances more planet destruction, to coning the general dumb public GDP into believing a growth based ponzie savings scheme will pay out a pension to the 2million investors over the next 40+ years.
                   Total BS and lies.
                   Until they front up on Kiwi Saver I will hold them in contempt.
                   The Greens are a bigger problem than National or Act, at least those two they are being honest, they want to destroy the planet. Where as the Greens are offering ‘hope’ when there isn’t any.

                   400ppm CO2 + 600 ppm CO2e = goodby humans
     • weka 2.1.3

       1 February 2015 at 3:19 pm

       Bill,

       “How to do that? Well a general labour and debt strike would do it. How to get the necessary numbers garnered to pull off such a thing? Well, blowing the gaff on the lies being fed to us (happy 2 degree possibilities) would be a bloody good start imo.”

       The two things you and marty are talking about are not only not incompatible, they’re both mutually interdependent and it’s essential they both happen, probably within a similar timeframe.

       What marty is talking about will give people the sense of security to do what you are talking about. Fear alone won’t do it (eg telling the truth about 2C*), you need to give people a creative way out or a way forward, and that’s why as well as mass political movement, we need mass transition/powerdown movement too.

       *just to clarify, your post today is essential and very good (easy read and accessible) and I certainly hope we see more of this kind of thing. I’m saying that when we say these things more we also have to give people something to do that will make them feel like change is worth it. There are very good reasons why those British scientists and politicians reacted to Anderson in the way they did. They’re human, and most humans aren’t designed to cope with catastrophe on this scale. One way to help people cope with the trauma is to lie/encourage cognitive dissonance. The other is to give them positive actions/solutions that engage other parts of their psyches.
       • Bill 2.1.3.1

         1 February 2015 at 3:36 pm

         I don’t think that I was really disagreeing with martymars the other day. Not substantially anyway. Regardless.

         Meanwhile, this type of thing comes up in some form or another over and over again…

         They’re human, and most humans aren’t designed to cope with catastrophe on this scale. One way to help people cope with the trauma is to lie/encourage cognitive dissonance. The other is to give them positive actions/solutions that engage other parts of their psyches.

         Human psychology is entirely malleable and shaped by habit and environment – not ‘designed’.

         As for ‘cognitive dissonance’, sorry, but that’s just fancy talk that permits rank fucking hypocrisy in my book.

         As for the best/more effective sort of encouragement, well that depends on a whole pile of variables, but sure, find and develop positive narratives wherever possible.

         And Cuba after the collapse of the USSR is a pretty good example of rapid adaptation.
         • weka 2.1.3.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 7:03 pm

           “I don’t think that I was really disagreeing with martymars the other day. Not substantially anyway. Regardless.”

           I wasn’t talking about the other day, I was referring to the false dichotomy appearing this thread between political action and community powerdown action (or however we want to name it).

           “Human psychology is entirely malleable and shaped by habit and environment – not ‘designed’.”

           That’s semantics. Yes, human psyches are malleable, but they’re also hardwired around a whole bunch of survival issues that are hundreds of thousands of years old (at least). Fight or flight/freeze is a real phenomenom. As is what happens to physiology when you put people under chronic stress.

           There’s a lot of very interesting work being done on brain malleability and rewiring, but it’s pretty clear that rewiring under chronic or excessive stress is actually quite hard, and some of it is completely outside of human control (hence people who end up with PTSD). This is the core of the work on trauma and recovery. That work is decades old now.

           “As for ‘cognitive dissonance’, sorry, but that’s just fancy talk that permits rank fucking hypocrisy in my book.”

           Cognitive dissonance denial, interesting. It’s a pretty well understood phenomenom, and people have been working with it in terms of CC, including some who have been doing it longer than you have been writing about CC. Joanna Macy is the most obvious example of someone who’s been helping people deal emotionally with things that are too big to deal with. She started her work on despair in the face of nuclear meltdown.

           What do you mean by rank hypocricy?

           “As for the best/more effective sort of encouragement, well that depends on a whole pile of variables, but sure, find and develop positive narratives wherever possible.”

           It’s not just about the narratives, although I agree that is important. It’s about the actions and presenting people with solutions not just problems. I’m speaking from the experience of people who have been helping people make the changes you are saying you want to have happen.

           “And Cuba after the collapse of the USSR is a pretty good example of rapid adaptation.”

           Cool, thanks for using an example that supports my point. Cuba were forced into Peak Oil. They didn’t convince their population to go there voluntarily, which is what we are talking about here.

           Cubans were arguably better prepared for peak oil than many wealthier countries. They’d already been through the revolution decades earlier and many people had already had time to adapt under stress, including learning those skills. Compare this to somewhere like NZ, where we haven’t had anything comparable since WW2, which means that most people alive don’t have those skills from experiencing something that affected the whole country (Māori would be the exception perhaps, because dealing with colonisation has been pretty continuous).

           We can look at a more limited, recent example in NZ. One of the big unspoken catastrophes from Chch is the rate of PTSD and related coping mechanisms. This is not just about the actual quakes, it’s about putting people into situations where they can’t cope and don’t have support over time.

           In any population you are going to have people that cope well. They’ve either got this naturally, or they’ve trained themselves, or they’ve been forced to adapt and had the resources to so well. For others it’s the opposite, they’re naturally not stress copers, they don’t have the opportunities to retrain themselves, and/or when they’re forced to adapt they either collapse or adapt in ways that enable survival but not doing well. Most people sit somewhere in between. People’s responses to stress are real and need to be taken into account.

           CC is stressful. It’s really stressful. It’s different than an acute emergency like an earthquake, but for people who haven’t developped coping mechanisms, it’s still hard to cope. They have to adapt and that doesn’t happen at the click of their (or someone else’s) fingers.

           Most people I know that are aware of how bad CC is have had to go through a process of accommodating that psychologically. Telling people they’re being rank hypocrites when they start talking about how CC affects their psyche is the equivalent of telling a traumatised person to just pull themselves together. Not only is it ignorant of reality, it generally doesn’t work.
           • marty mars 2.1.3.1.1.1

             1 February 2015 at 7:49 pm

             That is an awesome comment weka – the work on dealing with issues too big to be dealt with is extremely valuable and I’m going to read up about it. Dealing psychologically with the reality of CC is amazingly difficult – and I think we need to consider it like the grief cycle (maybe it is the actual grief cycle) in that we jump steps, we go backwards or regress sometimes. Whatever we do we will each have to work through this and comments like your really help – thanks again.
             • weka …

               2 February 2015 at 1:03 pm

               thanks marty, I was thinking it was falling on deaf ears. Grief, yes, and a good point about the cycle not being straighforward. I’d love to know what you end up reading and thinking.
               • Maui …

                 2 February 2015 at 6:40 pm

                 Yeah, I can liken it to grief. Over the last few months the more I’ve read and watch I’ve got quite down about it, and questioned could this actually be true? No it can’t be.. maybe it is, the world I’m living in has caused this, and noone is acknowledging it? wtf, etc. There is A LOT! to process there… There’s also the trouble of coming to terms with this on your own which is quite difficult. And more people will realise this and its likely they won’t have the support there as climate change is sort of like a taboo subject to talk about seriously with most ordinary people.
   • weka 2.2

     1 February 2015 at 3:12 pm

     marty,

     what to do – well i posted a jmg article about “downshifting our technological infrastructure to roughly 1950 – you said “My first reaction is to go in the opposite(?) direction.”
     http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-30012015/#comment-959689
     The reality is that no country addicted to the gods of progress is going to even entertain going back – even if it makes sense and is practically the only thing a country could do.

     I’m trying to think of examples where whole nations have reversed a fundamental position that was previously thought impossible. The end of the apartheid regime in South Africa? End of British rule in India? Maybe we should make a list of examples. My point being that we shouldn’t give up hope in this particular part of the puzzle.

     I also believe that we can get the powerdown conversation into the mainstream more and that this will have an effect (we’re on a tipping point after all).

     what to do – we need a movement dedicated to revitalising the old skills, the old ways of doing things based upon our lives today – I am interested in trying to build this, if you (whoever reads this) are email me.

     Transitions Towns, permaculture, and as you know many Māori still hold much knowledge. There are distinct reasons why the Transition Towns movement hasn’t gained more traction than it has (it’s stuck in the influencing culture stage, but is still short of revolution). One of them is that the TT crowd as largely apolitical, some in the sense of they see their time better spent in the garden so to speak, and some in the sense of believing that modern politics is defunct and therefore useless and to not be supported in anyway. I believe we will make much more headway when the TT people and the political radicals connect up and start working together.
     • Colonial Rawshark 2.2.1

       1 February 2015 at 3:23 pm

       I’m trying to think of examples where whole nations have reversed a fundamental position that was previously thought impossible. The end of the apartheid regime in South Africa? End of British rule in India?

       Sure there have been such instances. War time is when whole populations have willingly accepted that they have to make do with less income and less material goods.

       During such times the 0.1% continue to do fabulously well, I would note.
       • weka 2.2.1.1

         1 February 2015 at 3:31 pm

         The war one is interesting, and useful in terms of the powerdown, but a bit different I think. People will put up with things for a limited period of time. I’m talking about radical change that is permanent.
         • Colonial Rawshark 2.2.1.1.1

           2 February 2015 at 12:52 pm

           Given that there is no such thing as permanent change what we need is a successful 15-20 year transition to a low carbon economy. Basically a war economy is one way of doing it, where we build public and community infrastructure instead of munitions and tanks.

           Unfortunately, war is the one thing which gifts governments with the political capital to make such sweeping and radical alterations to the economy.
           • weka 2.2.1.1.1.1

             2 February 2015 at 12:57 pm

             Can you see the difference between a war that last 5 years and something like the fall of the Berlin Wall or the end of apartheid? I think you might be missing the point I was making to marty.
   • Pat O'Dea 2.3

     1 February 2015 at 8:38 pm

     “There is no political will to make the changes that could mitigate our ability to respond to the climate changes occurring.”
     MARTY MARS

     The strategy that I have come up with to overcome this lack of political will and that myself and others have been working on for the last two years, is a campaign to make New Zealand The World’s First Newcoal Free Country.

     A play of course, on the words Nuclear Free Country.

     If such a policy could be achieved it would be world news, possibly having a galvanising affect nationally and internationally to generate that missing political will. (Just as we did with our campaign to isolate apartheid South Africa)

     Already the Green Party and the Mana Party have made No New Coal Mines their official policy, hopefully our campaigning will see the Labour Party adopting the same position.

     After all, calling for No New Coal Mines is not an extreme position, and nowhere near what the science actually demands, which is to start winding down existing coal mines.

     It is those in favour of opening New Coal mines who hold the extreme position.

     While not being near enough, in the current political atmosphere No New Coalmines is a reasonable and achievable objective, in fact it is those who support more new coal mines who are becoming seen as the unreasonable nutters. Political parties that currently support new coal projects, (National and Labour) are increasingly inhabiting the lunatic fringe.

     But Auckland Coal Action the group I belong to, are not waiting on the politicians to act, and taking our cue from the anti nuclear movement and are implementing this policy on the ground.

     Already we have had some success, stopping Glencoal (a Fonterra subsidiary) from developing a New Coal mine project at Mangatangi, just South of Auckland. The first victory of this type that I am aware of.

     On the 7th of February ACA will be holding our AGM where we will decide our next campaign against New Coal Mines.
     Launching a new campaign around Solid Energy’s proposed reopening of the old Kopako 1 open cast mine at Maramarua, is one of the things we will be discussing and deciding on. Details, HERE

     All those who have an interest in action against climate change are welcome to attend.

     But why coal you may ask?

     For a number of reasons:

     James Hansen formerly of NASA has identified coal as the fossil fuel that is the most dangerous. Burning 1 ton of coal releases almost 3 tons of atmospheric CO2. “If we can’t stop coal it is all over for the climate”, says Hansen

     On a global scale coal is the single biggest (non feedback) cause of man made climate change and the most dangerous.

     Paradoxically coal forms a very small part of New Zealand’s economy and so should prove relatively easy to move away from. If New Zealand can’t do it how could we expect any other country too.

     In contrast, our closest geographical and cultural neighbor Australia is the world’s biggest coal exporter. A ban on new coal mines in this country will send powerful political ripples across the Tasman. Already 6 out of 10 Australians polled want their government to do more on climate change. And no wonder, Australia is one of the worst affected countries by climate change in the world.

     Already the Abbott government are in trouble over their support for new coal mines.

     Coal is the future, says Abbott

     Nothing else we could do here, would have a greater positive effect than to give a lead that may lead to a change in Australia coal policy.

     Disclosure: Pat O’Dea is the Mana spokesperson for climate change issues and a member of Auckland Coal Action
     https://aucklandcoalaction.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/aca-t-shirt-name.jpg
     • marty mars 2.3.1

       1 February 2015 at 9:37 pm

       Pat I think what you are doing is valuable to try and create the momentum to make the changes that need to happen – if the political will can be encapsulated behind a campaign that brings people along and stops new coal mines then that will create the ability to make the deep changes necessary.

       I’d also like to see it as part of a multi-pronged approach where personal and societal changes can be discussed and implemented.
       • Pat O'Dea 2.3.1.1

         1 February 2015 at 10:11 pm

         We all know that even 2 degree rise above base line is bad. 3 degrees is catastrophic maybe even unsurvivable, once postive feedbacks kick in.

         As you have hinted Marty and the scientists say, only a mobilisation on a scale that the world mobilised to fight WWII would (possibly) be enough to avoid this scenario.

         With human beings perception is everything.

         The first nation that takes real world action against climate change, (and I don’t mean frittering around the edges with rebates and carbon credits and pricing schemes) But real action that legislates to cut emissions, and in effect goes onto a wartime footing against climate change, will change global perception that this is a real problem that we all must get behind.

         To get just one country, (this one) to take real world action to effectively ban all new coal mining is one way of reaching that step change level in global perception.

         It is actions towards that goal that we are mobilising around.

         If you can Marty get to our AGM on the 7th at 1pm in Mt Eden. See the link above.
         • Robert Atack 2.3.1.1.1

           2 February 2015 at 10:49 am

           real world action = 80 -90 % unemployment, and the closing of maternity wards, I’ll vote for that )
   • Maui 2.4

     2 February 2015 at 6:54 pm

     Hi Marty, I will email you, I think that’s a great idea to get back to the old ways of doing things. There is a lot of talk here of what we should or could do here in these threads, but if you care enough about it you will act, and there seems to be a few people sitting on their high horse, experts on the subject and just willing to sit back and commentate. I don’t see much action to be blatantly honest. It’s all well and good talking about it, but we have to move now if we are to try and address the problem.
3. Macro 3

   1 February 2015 at 3:06 pm

   Strip out the faith in technologies not yet developed and that may never be developed; use available, up to date, data; stick to parameters that give high degrees of certainty, and what the science tells us, pretty fucking bluntly, is that we’re heading for 4 degrees or 6 degrees and that a 2 degrees future is virtually impossible now.

   Yes! But if you try telling that to the “greybeards” who fill and dominate our legislative chambers – e.g. Inhofe et al. – they’ll never believe you. 🙁
   • Macro 3.1

     1 February 2015 at 3:21 pm

     Further to the above comment:
     “24 House Republicans Just Voted To Deny The Reality Of Climate Change”
     http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/28/3215971/house-members-deny-climate-change/
   • Bill 3.2

     1 February 2015 at 3:23 pm

     Yeah macro, the point is that scientists need to fucking well speak up. The problem, as far as i can see it, is that they’ve been cowed in the face of implicit career/funding threats.

     I’ll put it another way. I do not know a single scientist involved in areas connected to AGW (I know a handful) who doesn’t say in private that things are much worse than is commonly reported in scientific reports (IPCC etc).
   • Colonial Rawshark 3.3

     1 February 2015 at 3:26 pm

     Supposedly, these “greybeards” have children and grandchildren.

     So if they continue on this suicide course are they sociopathic or just ignorant?
     • Macro 3.3.1

       1 February 2015 at 3:45 pm

       Sociopathic and ignorant. Leastways Inhofe is – his so called “presentation” to the Senate was so full of lies and misinformation as to be positively alarming.
       http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/26/medievaldeception-2015-inhofe-drags-senate-dark-ages
       But then he is the Chairman of the Committee and the States just voted to make it so – so what does one do about it?
4. Sacha 4

   1 February 2015 at 3:09 pm

   Why is the Standard publishing climate change denialism? The Tyndall kerfuffle has been well and truly debunked. There is no disagreement on the science except by those funded by the oil industry.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1

     1 February 2015 at 3:16 pm

     “…debunked…”

     Link please.
     • Sacha 4.1.1

       1 February 2015 at 3:20 pm

       Google is your friend. Try a couple of years back. Can’t be bothered wiping the bottoms of fantasists.
       • weka 4.1.1.1

         1 February 2015 at 3:25 pm

         Anderson isn’t a CC denialist, he’s been pushing for better understanding of CC, so I think it’s up to you to back up your claim.
         • Sacha 4.1.1.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 3:32 pm

           Anderson isn’t a denialist, but his team were attacked by them – and those attacks were debunked. Maybe I missed the point of the post.

           [ okay. I’m glad i held back from kicking you off this thread. Yes, you’ve missed (how?) the point of the post – Bill]
           • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.1.1.1

             1 February 2015 at 3:41 pm

             🙄

             Yeah, it looks that way, doesn’t it.
           • weka 4.1.1.1.1.2

             1 February 2015 at 3:44 pm

             Sacha, I have no idea what you are talking about. In your original comment you clearly state that the standard is publishing CC denialism.

             To summarise the post: scientists, politicians, businessmen are downplaying how serious the CC situation is (with some detail on how/why). What are we going to do next?
             • Sacha …

               1 February 2015 at 7:15 pm

               Sorry, I didn’t read it properly. My bad.
               • weka …

                 1 February 2015 at 7:17 pm

                 no worries, glad it got sorted before we all blew up 😉
                 • Sacha …

                   1 February 2015 at 7:43 pm

                   had a nap or it would have been sooner
                   • weka …

                     1 February 2015 at 7:50 pm

                     naps are always good IMO (if we all took more naps, the world would be in much better shape).
                   • marty mars …

                     1 February 2015 at 7:53 pm

                     it’s stink when it happens as i know from experience 🙂
                   • Sacha …

                     1 February 2015 at 8:02 pm

                     we’re only human
               • Pat O'Dea …

                 1 February 2015 at 10:29 pm

                 No probs. This is an issue that is easily to get overwraught about and make mistakes.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.2

         1 February 2015 at 3:39 pm

         Well, until that exchange I was interested in what you had to say.

         For such a debunked person Anderson sure has lots of papers published in Nature. Based on citations of the Royal Society article Beyond ‘dangerous’ climate change: emission scenarios for a new world, dissenting opinion looks pretty scarce.
   • barry 4.2

     1 February 2015 at 3:31 pm

     Kevin Anderson seems to still think it is true. e.g.

     http://kevinanderson.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Edinburgh-presentation-Oct-2013.pdf

     The overall science is clear. What they are arguing about is the extent of the problem.
5. phillip ure 5

   1 February 2015 at 3:22 pm

   i linked to an interesting new poll yesterday from america..

   ..it showed that 49% of registered republicans wd support politicians promising to do something about climate-change..

   ..and the figure was even higher for those who wd actively oppose a politician who denied climate-change is real..

   ..so once again..it isn’t the people who are the problem..(even among republicans..)

   ..it is the bought/owned politicians…again/still..
   • Colonial Rawshark 5.1

     1 February 2015 at 3:29 pm

     ..it showed that 49% of registered republicans wd support politicians promising to do something about climate-change..

     Were those registered Republicans told that they would have to give up their SUVs and their V8s?

     Because if they were, that number would plummet.
     • phillip ure 5.1.1

       1 February 2015 at 3:32 pm

       i wouldn’t be so cynical about that..

       ..i was surprised..as it showed deniers in a minority even amongst american republicans..

       ..and i was cheered by that..

       ..as it means change will happen soon..

       ..whether it will be enough/effective..

       ..is another story..
6. weka 6

   1 February 2015 at 3:40 pm

   David Holmgren, co-founder of permaculture and key transition player, came out at the end of 2013 with a call for crash on demand. Essentially he suggested that a small percentage of the middle classes withdrawing their investments would crash the global economy and force everyone into a powerdown and post-carbon societies.

   David’s argument is essentially that radical, but achievable, behaviour change from dependent consumers to responsible self-reliant producers (by some relatively small minority of the global middle class) has a chance of stopping the juggernaut of consumer capitalism from driving the world over the climate change cliff. It maybe a slim chance, but a better bet than current herculean efforts to get the elites to pull the right policy levers; whether by sweet promises of green tech profits or alternatively threats from mass movements shouting for less consumption.

   http://holmgren.com.au/crash-demand/

   I can’t see this happening yet (still too much denial). But I could see it happening if the 2C vs 4/6C thing gets into the mainstream and enough of the middle class wake up.

   People make out that the GP vote is so small, but from memory Holmgren’s scenario requires 10% of the population from wealthy countries to take action for the tipping point to come into play.

   I wouldn’t see this scenario as being sufficient on its own. The general labour/debt strike idea is very good too. The more actions the better.
   • Colonial Rawshark 6.1

     1 February 2015 at 4:04 pm

     The middle classes want economic growth, higher incomes and the greater consumption that supports. They do NOT want to crash the economy.
     • adam 6.1.1

       1 February 2015 at 5:13 pm

       But, Colonial Rawshark isn’t that the point of the post by Bill. Either by design, or wilful denial – the economy is going to crash. That a massive change in the environment in the range of 4-6 degrees is in essence, economic crash time. These temperatures mean more radical and disruptive weather patterns, higher and more sustained winds, and the regular occurrence of so called 1 on 100 year weather events. The military know this, why are the public so desperate to ignore it?

       We need to remind the middle class – that the desire for economic growth is fundamentally flawed. When growth, by it’s very nature, is killing the environment we have an economy in. Why do we keep repeating these suicidal acts?

       A debt strike – and a withdrawal of labour is one of many things we need. I’d say it is something that needed to happen yesterday. It’s fear, fear and fear which holds us back. Fear is the killer of many things – it may just be what ends us as a species.
       • weka 6.1.1.1

         1 February 2015 at 7:09 pm

         We have this small window of opportunity to prevent the worse case scenarios. So bringing the crash on increases our chances of that.

         CV’s categorisation of the middle classes while understandable is not helpful. It’s lazy, superficial labelling, that renders the parts of the middle classes that might be able to change invisible. Unless we believe that middle class change is unnecessary, in which case have at it.
         • adam 6.1.1.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 8:06 pm

           I don’t hold onto much hope for the middle class Weka. I really don’t, they have been in shell shock for a while and seem to me to be wilfully ignorant. I know. I know a whole class should not be stained with the same brush – but look at the last election – was it not the middle class – or the middle class presumptive – who decided to put this lot into power?

           It does seem to me, that they can’t lead a wet teabag, they are the most fearful and the most propagandised group in our society. They buy fully into liberalism, and liberalism is the enemy. Liberalism as an economic system, is the reason we are in this mess. And before some RWNJ jumps in, I do mean liberalism in all it’s guises – that includes the Marxist-Leninist economies of the old Warsaw pack and the other communist systems in Asia. Also the failure of social democracies in the west. Liberalism is a failed economic system. Neo-Liberalism just exasperates the problems.
     • weka 6.1.2

       1 February 2015 at 6:56 pm

       “The middle classes want economic growth, higher incomes and the greater consumption that supports. They do NOT want to crash the economy.”

       I’m assuming you didn’t bother to read the link, nor actually consider what I said (did you honestly read what I wrote, because it’s hard to fathom your response if you did).

       The various transition movements are full of the middle classes. I even pointed out the GP vote, which you keep telling me is also full of the middle class.

       I also made the argument for why the middle classes won’t do it now but might in the future.

       There’s also the argument to be made that the middle classes have both more responsibility and more capacity to lead this, because they’ve got more resilience built into their lives than many working class, precariats or under class.

       Honest to god, it’s this kind of negative thinking, narrow framing, and failure to engage with each others’ ideas that is our doom. How many dismissals and knock downs are there going to be in this thread?
       • Colonial Rawshark 6.1.2.1

         1 February 2015 at 7:25 pm

         Well, I don’t see any middle class Green voters, or reps from any other political party, telling their friends that our incomes and material standard of living have to drop.
         • weka 6.1.2.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 7:29 pm

           I on the other hand do. eg I know people that have made significant changes in their lives to downsize, and we have conversations about these things. There’s alot of discussion online. I guess we move in different circles. But that’s beside the point, which is that this is not going to happen now, but is a possibility as more people begin to wake up and we should be prepared for that and give those people a way forward.
           • Paul 6.1.2.1.1.1

             1 February 2015 at 7:33 pm

             Agreed.
             Have you read Derrick Jensen’s Endgame?

             Here’s a quote from it, relevant to our discussion.

             ‘“To reverse the effects of civilization would destroy the dreams of a lot of people. There’s no way around it. We can talk all we want about sustainability, but there’s a sense in which it doesn’t matter that these people’s dreams are based on, embedded in, intertwined with, and formed by an inherently destructive economic and social system. Their dreams are still their dreams. What right do I — or does anyone else — have to destroy them.
             At the same time, what right do they have to destroy the world?”

             ― Derrick Jensen, Endgame, Vol. 1: The Problem of Civilization
             • weka …

               1 February 2015 at 7:47 pm

               Thanks Paul. I haven’t read Endgame, but have read A Language Older Than Words, which was very influential on me. Have also listened to a bit of Jensen’s audio in the past and used to lurk on the forum.

               I’m cooking dinner and thinking through how to reply to you below about what is the right question. But these are good,

               Their dreams are still their dreams. What right do I — or does anyone else — have to destroy them.

               At the same time, what right do they have to destroy the world?”

               And I think there is a crux here in this thread. This is why I think cognitive dissonance is so important to address. How are we going to get people to take this seriously when we are talking about destroying their dreams?

               And, at the same time (and this is closer to what I meant about the right question), how do we stop destroying the world we are part of and upon which our very survival, but also our hopes and dreams (our soul), are dependent?
               • greywarshark …

                 1 February 2015 at 9:21 pm

                 We need to put out new dreams, some nostalgia from the past, mixed in with practical technology that retains people control and respect for the human ability, strength and frailties.

                 Perhaps, ideas again, there needs to be a Workable Future Scenario contest with some money and equipment prizes. Also a moving story that travels around New Zealand, and is invited to towns interested in participating, where people write little ideas credited to themselves as individuals, and then get together and put up to 400 words into the main theme, And if each town could include one idea that would be of practical help and give short examples or foreseen methods, there would be a mass of creative thought go into it.

                 It would be on paper, usually set up in the library if that was central, and people would prepare their pieces and scrutinise each others – no more than 200 wordsand also would be online – the main work would end up as a ‘magnum opus’ when it was finished and be available on line, to be downloaded, and be recorded at Te Papa which I assume would want this important piece of history. The individual pieces would be sorted as the writer chose, under set headings, and be available on line.

                 Then talk about it, follow up ideas, keep track of who was trying what and report on pilots. And in two years do it again. There is that thing about people owning projects, they need to have input and see that others round them think they are important. Having our heads beaten in with stuff about what we should do won’t evoke the group mentality, the community awareness that is needed. There was a huge effort put in by a group who worked on educating about the Waitangi Treaty and they were dedicated and achieved much. Now we have something of the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads, don’t know the equivalent Maori example. So even more important to stir and act.
                 • marty mars …

                   1 February 2015 at 10:16 pm

                   Some great ideas there grey.

                   I am connected* to happyzine – a positive online solutions focused website. In 2010 we created Dreams to Reality – where people put there ideas in and the chosen project received support, mentoring and encouragement – the entry that was chosen was based around creating rooftop vege gardens in Auckland – it was implemented.

                   http://happyzine.co.nz/category/dreamtoreality-project-planet/

                   The point of that example is that it can be done, it really can be – if we pull the ideas together and get people thinking of solutions. I’m thinking locally rather than trying to get countries to change. Keep the ideas coming – we need them.

                   * I am the husband of the founder 🙂
                 • weka …

                   2 February 2015 at 1:02 pm

                   You’re a very good ideas person grey. Have you connected with the sustainability, Transition Town type people in your area?

                   Did you see my reply to you the other in that other thread on powerdown?
         • Sacha 6.1.2.1.2

           1 February 2015 at 7:34 pm

           You have just seen one Green co-leader take a big paycut to spend more time at home. Commitment takes many forms.
           • Colonial Rawshark 6.1.2.1.2.1

             1 February 2015 at 7:52 pm

             I presume he’s paid off the mortgage, got plenty saved up, has a partner who works and earns a solid income. Sounds like he’s living the dream to me.
     • Paul 6.1.3

       1 February 2015 at 7:21 pm

       Have you read Derrick Jensen’s ‘Endgame.?

       Here’s a quote from it.

       “In order to maintain our way of living, we must tell lies to each other, and especially to ourselves.”
       ― Derrick Jensen, Endgame, Vol. 1: The Problem of Civilization
       • Colonial Rawshark 6.1.3.1

         1 February 2015 at 7:57 pm

         No I haven’t but I do listen to the interviews and radio shows that he does.
         • Paul 6.1.3.1.1

           1 February 2015 at 8:03 pm

           The book is well worth your time.
   • melliodora 6.2

     2 February 2015 at 12:21 am

     If you are living near Melbourne, there is a live debate on this as part of SLF this month. The great debate to discuss “to collapse or not to collapse”. The panel includes David Holmgren himself along with George Monbiot and Nicole Foss.
     https://www.facebook.com/SustainableLivingFestival
     • weka 6.2.1

       2 February 2015 at 9:14 am

       Thanks! Will there be a recording of this?
7. dave brown 7

   1 February 2015 at 4:37 pm

   It’s too late to worry about winning over the 1% or the middle class to prevent ecological collapse as their stake in capitalism continues over our dead bodies.

   2 degrees has come and gone and abrupt climate collapse is now a certainty.
   http://guymcpherson.com/2014/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/

   The fight is over what to do about it.

   Capitalism is the problem so the end of capitalism is the solution.

   We can chose resignation, fiddling, or revolution.

   Revolution may not be enough to stop the feedback loops making us extinct, but at least we will give it a go and stop the useless chatter.

   I think I posted this on TS some time back.
   http://redrave.blogspot.co.nz/2009/12/climate-change-dire-emergency.html
   • Paul 7.1

     1 February 2015 at 6:08 pm

     Read Derrick Jensen’s Endgame.
     Compulsory reading on the subject of catastrophic climate change.

     Some quotes from it.

     ‘Surely by now there can be few here who still believe the purpose of government is to protect us from the destructive activities of corporations. At last most of us must understand that the opposite is true: that the primary purpose of government is to protect those who run the economy from the outrage of injured citizens.’

     ‘In order to maintain our way of living, we must tell lies to each other, and especially to ourselves.’

     “Premise Eight: The needs of the natural world are more important than the needs of the economic system.”
   • weka 7.2

     1 February 2015 at 7:12 pm

     “Revolution may not be enough to stop the feedback loops making us extinct, but at least we will give it a go and stop the useless chatter.”

     But it might be enough, and my contention is that revolutionary change will only happen in time if we do more than scare people.
     • Paul 7.2.1

       1 February 2015 at 7:35 pm

       Do what then?
       Ask the 1% nicely?
       • weka 7.2.1.1

         1 February 2015 at 7:58 pm

         I tend to think pinning hopes on the 1% is a waste of time, but I do think things like divestment from carbon are important, both for practical reasons and for the messages it sends to people. I guess I count on those things as bonuses to the real stuff.

         Other than that, I think many of the things being discussed in this thread. Raise people’s awareness of both the 2C vs 4/6C issue that Bill has outlined. Raise awareness of the powerdown or however you want to frame. Present people with proactive solutions, things they can do themselves (in other words make connections between theory and practice).

         That might all sound woolly in the face of calls for revolution, but I think we are at a tipping point. Consider how much has changed around acceptance of CC in the past 5 years. That’s huge. We need to keep encouraging people to keep thinking about this and figuring out how to change.

         I’m also a fan of the preparation crowd (Transition Towns etc). Lots to do there, and here’s the thing. The things we can do to prepare for collapse are exactly the things that mitigate CC. They’re also the things we need to be doing anyway for a whole bunch of sustainability reasons (peak soil, pollution, overpopulation etc).
   • adam 7.3

     1 February 2015 at 8:10 pm

     But we don’t need the revolutions of old.

     We need to stop paying our debt and we need to withdraw our labour.

     We have a non-violent solution, a non-violent revolution.
     • Paul 7.3.1

       1 February 2015 at 8:18 pm

       We can learn from the Greeks.
     • weka 7.3.2

       1 February 2015 at 8:28 pm

       nice and succint adam. Ideas on how to get there?
       • Paul 7.3.2.1

         1 February 2015 at 8:30 pm

         And learn from Scotland.
       • adam 7.3.2.2

         1 February 2015 at 8:31 pm

         Please Mr Bill. Put a few idea up for Weka.
         • weka 7.3.2.2.1

           1 February 2015 at 9:01 pm

           What?
           • Colonial Rawshark 7.3.2.2.1.1

             1 February 2015 at 9:52 pm

             adam already described it. Stop paying your debts and your taxes, your rent or your mortgage, withdraw your labour from the formal economy, give no money whatsoever to the corporate machine.

             Problem is, the alternative/parallel systems of living and economics do not yet exist for people to ‘opt out’ in this way and live any kind of dignified life without strife and troubles.
             • weka …

               1 February 2015 at 10:33 pm

               Yes, I understand that. What I am asking is how we get people to do that. Hence my question wasn’t “what do we need to do?”, it was “how do we get there?”.

               (also noting the use of ‘your’ in that first paragraph. Obviously me doing those things is going to be bugger all use. We need to do them).

               “Problem is, the alternative/parallel systems of living and economics do not yet exist for people to ‘opt out’ in this way and live any kind of dignified life without strife and troubles.”

               Plenty of people in NZ doing the work on those things already (some of them are even middle class).

               So, we know what needs to be done. We know two of the things preventing them from being done (fear, lack of new structures). What next?
               • Colonial Rawshark …

                 1 February 2015 at 10:40 pm

                 If you want to convince large numbers of Kiwis, and I mean hundreds of thousands, you’re going to have to show them clear immediate and short term advantages for themselves, of taking the option up.

                 (also noting the use of ‘your’ in that first paragraph. Obviously me doing those things is going to be bugger all use. We need to do them).

                 No, “WE” have no requirement to do anything. That’s the problem.
                 • weka …

                   1 February 2015 at 10:48 pm

                   How do individuals have a requirement to do anything?

                   “If you want to convince large numbers of Kiwis, and I mean hundreds of thousands, you’re going to have to show them clear immediate and short term advantages for themselves, of taking the option up”

                   Yes, and that’s more of what we need to do, not how we’re going to do it. Or how you’re going to do it. See what I’m getting at?
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     1 February 2015 at 10:58 pm

                     I’m working with a team of people to make a difference down here in Dunedin. What we do as a group will have some wider flow on effects of course. But we have no intentions to take that on as a responsibility or a goal on our shoulders.
                   • weka …

                     1 February 2015 at 11:31 pm

                     That’s true for me too.

                     So what we are really doing here is talking theory and not talking specifics. Is there a reason you won’t talk specifics? I don’t mean taking on the responsibility, I mean talking about how these things could happen? Is it too risky?

                     If we won’t talk about this who will?
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     2 February 2015 at 12:22 am

                     General theory, concepts, types of projects and handy hints are always informative to talk about of course.

                     Specifics relate to the environment, people, skills, resources and opportunities that are on hand. None of this is necessarily confidential but I am not any kind of nominated spokesperson so don’t go into those details.
                   • weka …

                     2 February 2015 at 1:27 am

                     Yes, I agree. I wasn’t talking about the latter. But I think there is something between “we need a labour/debt strike” and that, and I’m feeling frustration that on ts we can’t take this to the next level.
             • Paul …

               2 February 2015 at 9:18 am

               Wherever possible do not go into debt.
               The money system is built on it.
       • adam 7.3.2.3

         1 February 2015 at 8:31 pm

         Please Mr Bill. Put a few ideas up for Weka.
         • dave brown 7.3.2.3.1

           2 February 2015 at 12:01 am

           Its delusional to think that we can overthrow capitalism peacefully.
           That way we hand the capitalists the victory and ourselves certain extinction.
           The people of Syria began their revolution with peaceful marches. They were attacked, tortured, murdered and starved. One of the effects of climate change, drought, was a factor in their revolution.
           The Palestinians have had two intifadas and there will be more.
           People fight back without fear when their existence is at stake.
           Climate change threatens our existence.
           That surely demands a strong resistance.
           When the ruling class unleashes its cops, mercenaries, fascist gangs, military coups etc on the people, only the armed people can defeat such attacks.
           There is no such thing as a peaceful revolution because the counter-revolution is armed and ruthless.
           • Colonial Rawshark 7.3.2.3.1.1

             2 February 2015 at 12:26 am

             Syria is a bad example as the west has been deliberately starving the Syrian economy for many years and more recently allowing a flood of foreign fighters and weapons in.

             That has done more harm to the Syrian people in the last 3 years than Assad and his father had in the last 30.
             • dave brown …

               2 February 2015 at 8:39 am

               CV you do realise that this could be a description of most third world countries ruled by dictators as clients of imperialism?
               The Syrian revolution is a genuine national democratic revolution and forced to fight on three fronts against enemies which ultimately serve the the economic interests of the West in suppressing the popular Arab revolution.
               I did also use the case of Palestine which is occupied by a more obvious stooge of the US.
               The point is that when the Western powers are driven to such extreme measures to retain control it is because the populations will no longer tolerate such oppression and rise up.
               To succeed they are forced to arm themselves.
               It will also be the fate of NZ should it suffer a decline into the ‘third world’ and the Key bonapartist regime move towards a fascist state to suppress a popular resistance.
               My point is that armed resistance is ultimately the only recourse of the masses against imperialism, and that NZ is no exception.
               In the US this is celebrated every year as ‘The American Revolution’.
               Today all other national liberation revolutions are labelled ‘terror’.
               • Colonial Rawshark …

                 2 February 2015 at 8:50 am

                 The Syrian revolution is a genuine national democratic revolution and forced to fight on three fronts against enemies which ultimately serve the the economic interests of the West

                 IMO there’s very little “genuine” or “democratic” about an influx of many thousands of foreign fighters armed and financed by foreigners.

                 Many of these fighters want to see Assad’s secular dictatorship gone and replaced by a religious dictatorship via a civil war which has now killed well over a hundred thousands civilians and displaced a million more.
                 • dave brown …

                   2 February 2015 at 12:39 pm

                   You are wrong.
                   I have followed this revolution from the beginning.
                   The influx of foreign fighters is not part of the revolution.
                   It is a scandalous affront to the Syrian martyrs in this revolution that you attribute their revolutionary agency to some external force.
                   Check out the many articles that testify to a popular non-sectarian revolution holding out against Assad’s barrel bombs, Jabhat Al Nusra, and ISIL etc., in this blog.
                   https://syriafreedomforever.wordpress.com/
                   Scroll down to whichever language you are most comfortable with.
                   Especially look at Aleppo and Kafranbel.
                   A good review article
                   https://syriafreedomforever.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/the-revolutionary-process-caught-in-the-grip-of-reactionary-forces/
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     2 February 2015 at 1:03 pm

                     A “scandalous affront”???

                     Tell me mate, if not from foreign backers – and I am pointing at Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Jordan as well as France, UK and USA – where have the Syrian fighters gotten their soldiers, armaments, munitions and funding from such that Assad only controls half the land area of Syria now?

                     There is nothing “democratic” or noble about this “revolution” it has been an utter bloodbath for the Syrian people including 9 MILLION refugees.

                     And all the US cares about is that Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah influence over the country is ended, and for that to happen Assad has to be gone.
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     2 February 2015 at 1:35 pm

                     ISIL/ISIS now in control of most towns in Northern and Eastern Syria.

                     http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/12/world/middleeast/the-iraq-isis-conflict-in-maps-photos-and-video.html?_r=0
                 • dave brown …

                   2 February 2015 at 3:14 pm

                   You didn’t go to the blog link I posted did you?
                   You obviously take you cue from the New York Times and other source that think that the US is manipulating the Syrian people like puppets.
                   Go back over the 4 years of this war and find out when the jihadists came on the scene.
                   The blog I cited covers most of that period.
                   You will find for all you bluster than this revolution began as peaceful protests in the streets that then spread to most parts of Syria.
                   These protests were met with brutal force and this is where most the the deaths you mention arise. Only in response to this repression did the Free Syrian Army emerge.
                   The fact that this non-sectarian popular uprising was successful created a problem for the US and for Russia who both have a stake in preventing the Arab revolution from following the example of the Syrian armed revolution.
                   The imperialists know that there main enemy is not this or that jihadist sect, but the armed Arab people, especially the uniting of the struggles in MENA behind the Palestinian struggle.
                   So the US blocked the source of manpads going to the popular forces for most of this time until it could find some element of the Free Syrian Army it could trust to keep a lid on the revolution.
                   It hoped to source a new regime that could replace Assad from its ranks.
                   Assad meanwhile was losing the war so resorted to poison gas and now barrel bombs.
                   But still the resistance exists and if you bothered to check the blog, you would see that it fights on three fronts against Assad, Al Nusra as well as the IS.
                   To claim that this popular revolution does not exist and that the war in Syria is no more than between puppets funded by various external powers ultimately aligned to the US and Russia/China, is to promote a modern version of Orientalism which denies non-Europeans any revolutionary agency.
                   You need to think about that.
                   Meanwhile don’t call me ‘mate’.
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     2 February 2015 at 3:36 pm

                     So what’s your point?

                     My point is that the armed struggle in Syria has cost approx 200,000 civilian lives and 9M displaced.

                     The majority of Syria is going to be a failed state with a rump held by Assad around Damascus and the southern end of the country.

                     The rest of it is going to be run by ISIL/ISIS.

                     There will be no democracy, and the lot of the Syrian people is today, and for the foreseeable future, far worse than it was 5 or 6 years ago.

                     You didn’t go to the blog link I posted did you?

                     To be honest, after going through for a couple of minutes all it showed me is that armed revolution does nothing except destroy the lives of millions. In exchange for what – a semblance of temporary freedom in some small areas of Syria. The only thing which hasn’t changed is poverty and unemployment.

                     But still the resistance exists and if you bothered to check the blog, you would see that it fights on three fronts against Assad, Al Nusra as well as the IS.

                     And where does this ‘popular resistance’ get its funding from? Its munitions? If not from foreigners.
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     2 February 2015 at 3:40 pm

                     These protests were met with brutal force and this is where most the the deaths you mention arise. Only in response to this repression did the Free Syrian Army emerge.

                     The chart on wikipedia shows that the death toll in Syria started rocketing up around week 65 of the civil war, and has stayed on a steep slope upwards ever since. In the first year, casualties were relatively low.

                     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War
                   • dave brown …

                     2 February 2015 at 7:25 pm

                     The point is the armed insurrection is necessary to overthrow the rotten capitalist system and that this is now widely accepted in the countries oppressed by imperialism.
                     I think you have to credit the Syrian people with the right to fight a just war at whatever the cost. The right to fight for life is a basic human right.
                     How do you think Syrians, Palestinians, Libyans, Egyptians etc are going to get rid of dictators and win their democratic rights if not by armed struggle?
                     In every struggle of this sort the price is many martyrs.
                     Democracy can never be won by begging dictators to stand down, they just torture and kill.
                     I would say Israel is a failed state because it exists on the basis of armed occupation at the expense of the democratic national rights of Palestinians.
                     Do you accept the right of Palestinians to armed revolution?
                     There is no inevitability of Syria being a ‘failed state’ in your sense.
                     Syria has the chance to become a free, democratic, non-sectarian state provided those fighting for democracy are armed with heavy weapons.
                     Most people supported the YPG fight to defend Kobane from the IS especially the women’s militias.
                     Uniting the democratic Syrian, Palestinian, Kurdish and Iraqi forces again sectarians and jihadists, backed by workers in the imperialist countries to stop the ‘war on terror’ is the only solution.
                     The point about revolution is that it overturns the failed system that is threatening the existence of humanity.
                     Capitalism has proven that it will not allow even an Occupy movement on the streets without armed repression.
                     How do you think the overthrow of capitalism to prevent economic and ecological destruction can be done without armed insurrection?
8. dave brown 8

   1 February 2015 at 5:12 pm

   Correction 2 C has not come and gone but is “locked in”.
   So it will come and we will be gone.
9. Richard Christie 9

   1 February 2015 at 5:32 pm

   2 deg has always been a feel good, delusional limit.

   Why? – because it is invariably attached to a date and not given as an limit beyond which we should strive not to venture. Perhaps cast in these terms because those that propose it assume any longer term thinking is beyond us.

   Phrases such as “keeping change within 2deg by next century” are not the same as “ensuring change remains below 2 deg, this century, the next and beyond”.
10. CnrJoe 10

    1 February 2015 at 5:45 pm

    our furious fiddling is throwing off sparks and our rome burns down around our ears
    we’re done
    all this suffering and ecstasy signifying
    nothing
    how do ts readers and writers who are parents cope with the facts? as an uncle i could do with some tips
    h/tip phil ure – this is the end of ‘capital’ism for me starting now
    • marty mars 10.1

      1 February 2015 at 8:17 pm

      As a person with one son and another due in days I look for the good – and it is there. It may be considered simplistic but in my mind it is the best option – in the good we find hope, we find connection and we find peace and acceptance.
      • greywarshark 10.1.1

        1 February 2015 at 8:48 pm

        @ marty mars
        All the best. Hope all goes well with good timing, and let us know results.
11. Colonial Rawshark 11

    1 February 2015 at 6:28 pm

    Why are the super rich preparing bug out locations with getaway cars, air strips and space age security?

    Seems like they fear what is coming.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-31/what-do-they-know-why-are-so-many-super-wealthy-preparing-bug-out-locations
    • adam 11.1

      1 February 2015 at 8:12 pm

      Hence the draconian laws as well.
      • Paul 11.1.1

        1 February 2015 at 8:16 pm

        And the purchase of land in NZ by members of the global 1%
        • Colonial Rawshark 11.1.1.1

          1 February 2015 at 9:55 pm

          Global 0.01%…
          • Paul 11.1.1.1.1

            1 February 2015 at 10:00 pm

            Yes…these sort of people.

            The Super-Rich and Us BBC Documentary 2015 Episode 1
            • Colonial Rawshark 11.1.1.1.1.1

              1 February 2015 at 10:06 pm

              Ahhh it was a good doco…it was you who linked to it previously yes? I must watch part 2 sometime.
              • Paul …

                1 February 2015 at 10:09 pm

                Episode 2
                
12. Paul 12

    1 February 2015 at 7:12 pm

    The Mariner’s Rule from the Archdruid Report.

    http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-mariners-rule.html

    ‘One of the things my readers ask me most often, in response to this blog’s exploration of the ongoing decline and impending fall of modern industrial civilization, is what I suggest people ought to do about it all. It’s a valid question, and it deserves a serious answer.

    Now of course not everyone who asks the question is interested in the answers I have to offer. A great many people, for example, are only interested in answers that will allow them to keep on enjoying the absurd extravagance that passed, not too long ago, for an ordinary lifestyle among the industrial world’s privileged classes, and is becoming just a little bit less ordinary with every year that slips by. To such people I have nothing to say. Those lifestyles were only possible because the world’s industrial nations burnt through half a billion years of stored sunlight in a few short centuries, and gave most of the benefits of that orgy of consumption to a relatively small fraction of their population; now that easily accessible reserves of fossil fuels are running short, the party’s over.’
    • weka 12.1

      1 February 2015 at 7:25 pm

      This is why I don’t read the Archdruid much anymore, but am grateful to those that do (he needs to do a tl;dr). I skimmed through to find what he though we could do, as opposed to what we can’t do. Don’t think I found it, apart from getting out of debt, paying attention to climate shifts, and understanding that collapse comes in waves. Those are all strategies for personal and family survival. I think it’s the wrong question.
      • Paul 12.1.1

        1 February 2015 at 7:27 pm

        What is the right question?
      • Colonial Rawshark 12.1.2

        1 February 2015 at 8:37 pm

        I think you over-estimate the revolutionary potential of the middle classes, to paraphrase Marx.

        Regarding John Michael Greer, he is writing from a mostly USA based perspective. Over there, their democracy is long gone. There is no point trying to get change through the mechanisms of the Federal Government or via the major political parties. As Chris Hedges says – you are wasting your time pouring your money and energy into a dead, unresponsive political system.

        Your options therefore are to go off-grid – like JMG is doing – or participate in non-violent resistance – like Hedges and Jensen are doing.

        In NZ, our politics is still somewhat responsive to the voice of the people. So we are not in quite the dire straits that they are over there.
        • Paul 12.1.2.1

          1 February 2015 at 8:40 pm

          Always enjoy your perceptive comments.
          We have totally lost an independent media here in NZ and this may make it easier for us to become more like the corporately controlled state the US has become.
13. philj 13

    1 February 2015 at 8:03 pm

    Calling Mathew Hoots, where is your family’s hide away?
    • CnrJoe 13.1

      1 February 2015 at 9:45 pm

      heh
14. Colonial Rawshark 14

    1 February 2015 at 10:15 pm

    3.5 deg C to 5.0 deg C warming by 2100 the most likely range: Newsweek Dec 16, 2014

    Post Lima discussions, it seems to me that the MSM is putting it out there even if some scientists aren’t.

    http://www.newsweek.com/study-confirms-lima-agreement-puts-us-past-2-degrees-warming-benchmark-292535
    • marty mars 14.1

      2 February 2015 at 9:13 am

      I think the big issue around this is that that degree of warming is unknown and perhaps unknowable for people, in that they think, Oh well we will be able to grow bananas in Bluff or yeah more summers like the one we are having. And in some ways they are correct – 2100 may as well be 4635 for most people – they’ll be dead anyway and sure the descendants will be there but they will adapt – that’s what smart monkeys do. So any impetus for action TODAY is pushed out, pretend-forgotten and slapped down.
      • Colonial Rawshark 14.1.1

        3 February 2015 at 4:15 pm

        I do wonder why it is so difficult for “grown ups” to think ahead to 2100. If you have a child this year, then it is their children who will have to deal with climate change in 2100. Surely it’s not that far away?
15. Colonial Rawshark 15

    1 February 2015 at 10:22 pm

    PWC: World is on track for 4 deg C warming – The Guardian Sept 2014

    If even the corporate consulting firms are saying it, that’s pretty much game over if we stick to the status quo.

    I’d suggest that it’s well out in the open that we are going to miss 2 deg C by a country mile. Annoyingly, I suspect that I’ll see the chaos of 2 deg C warming well within my lifetime, let alone by 2100.

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/southern-crossroads/2014/sep/09/new-york-climate-summit-two-degrees-warming-policy-disaster
    • Paul 15.1

      2 February 2015 at 9:20 am

      4 degrees will mean the collapse of ‘civilisation’
      • Richard McGrath 15.1.1

        2 February 2015 at 7:27 pm

        If that ever happened humans would adapt, and that would probably prove cheaper then trying to alter the climate by frantically lowering our standard of living.
        • Colonial Rawshark 15.1.1.1

          3 February 2015 at 4:59 pm

          Since when was “cheaper” the criteria for deciding whether or not to prevent two to three billion deaths?
        • Sacha 15.1.1.2

          3 February 2015 at 5:17 pm

          “that would probably prove cheaper ”

          citation needed
16. Johnm 16

    2 February 2015 at 10:54 am

    Hi Everyone 🙂

    Did any of you see the interview by Paul Henry of Guy Mcpherson some months ago? basically these rises in temps will destroy our food production and human habitat generally leading to human extinction. As I’m 66 and facing near term human extinction anyway it doesn’t worry me. Anyway that’s the gist: I hope he’s wrong! But, McPherson is a sober non nut case person so I fear he may be correct.
    http://guymcpherson.com/2014/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/
17. Richard McGrath 17

    2 February 2015 at 7:23 pm

    Examples abound of alarmist scaremongering, this is just one more.

    For instance:

    March 2000, Dr David Viner, scientist at the (now infamous) climate research unit at University of East Anglia: “in a few years, snowfall will become a rare and exciting event… children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

    13 December 2008, Albert Gore: ” The entire north polar ice cap will be gone within 5 years.”

    4 August 2008, Ted Scambos (scientist from Ice & Snow Data Centre): “There’s a group that makes a strong case that in 2012 or 2013 we’ll have an ice-free [Arctic summer]…”

    And so on, and so forth.

    The alarmists really are becoming more and more shrill, it’s getting embarrassing listening to what amounts to desperate pleading for more handouts.
    • mickysavage 17.1

      2 February 2015 at 7:25 pm

      Gee three wrong comments, and thousands of correct predictions are wrong …
      • Richard McGrath 17.1.1

        2 February 2015 at 10:09 pm

        @MS, these are just 3 of many examples that are not just wrong, they are laughably wrong.
        • McFlock 17.1.1.1

          2 February 2015 at 10:14 pm

          And yet the vast bulk of predictions have been pretty accurate, if not erring on the side of caution (aka “very unlaughably wrong”).
          But those are the peer-reviewed ones, not cherry-picked interview or presentation comments taken out of context.
    • Macro 17.2

      3 February 2015 at 4:01 pm

      Alert! Ignoramus, and useful idiot to the Fossil Fuel Industry!
      But then lets not let facts get in the way.
      https://www.wmo.int/media/?q=content/warming-trend-continues-2014
      But then this twit obviously know better than every one else. Must be hard for him, being so infallible and so unerringly right all the time.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS