You are stealing our future

Written By: - Date published: 9:51 am, December 16th, 2018 - 94 comments
Categories: climate change, Conservation, disaster, Environment, global warming, science, sustainability, United Nations - Tags:

And the text of the speech from DemocracyNow:

My name is Greta Thunberg. I am 15 years old, and I’m from Sweden. I speak on behalf of Climate Justice Now!

Many people say that Sweden is just a small country, and it doesn’t matter what we do. But I’ve learned that you are never too small to make a difference. And if a few children can get headlines all over the world just by not going to school, then imagine what we could all do together if we really wanted to.

But to do that, we have to speak clearly, no matter how uncomfortable that may be. You only speak of green eternal economic growth because you are too scared of being unpopular. You only talk about moving forward with the same bad ideas that got us into this mess, even when the only sensible thing to do is pull the emergency brake. You are not mature enough to tell it like it is. Even that burden you leave to us children.

But I don’t care about being popular. I care about climate justice and the living planet. Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people to continue making enormous amounts of money. Our biosphere is being sacrificed so that rich people in countries like mine can live in luxury. It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few.

The year 2078, I will celebrate my 75th birthday. If I have children, maybe they will spend that day with me. Maybe they will ask me about you. Maybe they will ask why you didn’t do anything while there still was time to act. You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.

Until you start focusing on what needs to be done, rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope. We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis. We need to keep the fossil fuels in the ground, and we need to focus on equity. And if solutions within the system are so impossible to find, then maybe we should change the system itself.

We have not come here to beg world leaders to care. You have ignored us in the past, and you will ignore us again. We have run out of excuses, and we are running out of time. We have come here to let you know that change is coming, whether you like it or not. The real power belongs to the people. Thank you.

94 comments on “You are stealing our future ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Draco T Bastard 1
    16 December 2018 at 11:02 am

    The real power belongs to the people. Thank you.

    I do wish that were true. If it did then maybe we’d be able to get something done.

    But the power lies in the hands of the corporations and the politicians that they’ve bought kept there by a system that’s designed to ensure that the people don’t have power.

    • SpaceMonkey 1.1
      16 December 2018 at 2:39 pm

      The real power belongs to the Earth. That’s the real point of “change is coming”. We have an opportunity (getting smaller) to proactively “pull the emergency brake”, as Greta says, or the Earth will do it to us. And the Earth will not discriminate.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1
        16 December 2018 at 3:42 pm

        And the Earth will not discriminate.

        Mother Nature does not negotiate and does not take prisoners.

        Change will come. If we’re still around at the end of it is up for debate but only amongst ourselves. So far all we have is the rich telling us that they must continue to get richer from all the activities that will destroy us.

        We have the choice of acting rationally or the choice of continuing to listen to rich people.

    • Grafton Gully 1.2
      17 December 2018 at 9:26 am

      “The one thing I learned when I was Prime Minister is that while you think the Government has power, it has nothing compared to the power that the private sector has.”
      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12167950

      • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1
        17 December 2018 at 10:26 am

        And that is the problem. The private sector should never have that sort of power.

      • Pat 1.2.2
        17 December 2018 at 10:28 am

        thats because governments gave the power away and now realise that they have allowed the private sector to develop beyond regulation….the con of the century (last)

    • Aaron 1.3
      17 December 2018 at 1:13 pm

      @Draco T Bastard. The people have the most power and have always had it – not as individuals, but collectively. Governments and corporations spend a lot of time convincing us that we don’t have any power but a quick look through history will show that people power is the only thing that has advanced the world we live in.

      You can go as far back as the middle ages where huge battles were fought over whether the King was above the law or not through the gradual changes of who had a right to vote, workers in Germany striking to end WW1, the Labour movements of the 20th century (which everyone here should be aware of), the New Deal, the movements of the 60’s – are just a few examples

      There is not one instance where powerful people voluntarily gave away some of the power, instead it is always normal people taking power from the powerful.

      I’m not saying it will be easy but the truth is that the only thing that can stop us is our own lack of belief.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1
        17 December 2018 at 1:37 pm

        Bloody revolution is democracy carried on by other means.

        You’re right of course. We do have the power – if we work together.

        A democratic society is communist by default.

        • Bewildered 1.3.1.1
          17 December 2018 at 7:49 pm

          “A democratic society is communist by default “

          Until they start killing people who disagree USSR CAMBODIA CHINA …….

          • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.1.1
            18 December 2018 at 12:43 am

            None of the so-called communist countries were democratic.

            Of course, neither are we,

            • RedLogix 1.3.1.1.1.1
              18 December 2018 at 12:49 pm

              Of course, neither are we,

              Compared to what? Some idealist, non-realisable model of perfection?

              Every democrat recognises that democracy is messy; the making of sausages being the usual metaphor invoked at this point.

              Certainly there a many idea we can have to improve. But here’s the catch; most new ideas are failures or have major unintended consequences. Only a small fraction of ideas turn out to be worthwhile.

              Yet unless we do try new ideas we stagnate and eventually fail anyway. The trick is thinking about how to find the balance between keeping things going while evolving worthwhile new patterns at the same time.

              Simplistic slogans like ‘killing capitalism” don’t cut mustard.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                18 December 2018 at 1:18 pm

                Compared to what? Some idealist, non-realisable model of perfection?

                But we still need to reach for it else we’re just stagnating and entrenching a system that is obviously failing.

                Yet unless we do try new ideas we stagnate and eventually fail anyway.

                That’s just it – we’re not trying new ideas in our democratic structures.

                • RedLogix …
                  18 December 2018 at 2:23 pm

                  Maybe because the last few times the left tried out “big experiments” in Russia, China … well anywhere in fact … it ended in utter disaster.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    18 December 2018 at 3:35 pm

                    It’s now been confirmed that there will be a referendum about legalising recreational marijuana use.

                    It’s not hard and its binding on the government.

                    Now, how hard would it be to do that for every major policy change?

                    That’s not a big change and it’s unlikely to end in disaster. But it will make us more democratic.

                    And just because a previous attempt ended in disaster doesn’t mean that a new one will. Especially when the previous attempt didn’t even survive two months in being ‘left’.

                    • RedLogix …
                      18 December 2018 at 3:51 pm

                      Especially when the previous attempt didn’t even survive two months in being ‘left’.

                      Read Glulag Archipeligo again. I have, twice. The second time was even more punishing than the first. Stalin’s regime was insistent on it’s ideological purity; that indeed was it’s own self-rationalisation and justification for it’s mass crimes.

                      Not one single attempt at a hard left revolution has worked. Even slightly. It’s a failed idea, and if you imagine that ‘your version’ of a revolution will work out any better … I’d offer this as the very definition of hubris.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      18 December 2018 at 4:09 pm

                      As I said – the USSR wasn’t communist. It most definitely wasn’t left. And that comes from academic researchers.

                      And I’m not talking about a revolution. I’m talking about a few changes that make us more democratic.

                    • RedLogix …
                      18 December 2018 at 4:20 pm

                      You can play with words all you like, but Joe Stalin knew exactly what his politics were.

                      Of course all the Bolsheviks imagined their Marxist revolution would be wonderful, but most only survived just long enough to discover the true horror of it.

                      You’re talking to probably the only person here who has made the effort to visit one of the few remaining gulags, so maybe my perspective is a bit more vivid than yours.

  2. Ad 2
    16 December 2018 at 12:00 pm

    Well who knows perhaps it worked.

    COP24 rule book is agreed in the last hour.

    Hopefully someone here will analyze it.

    • greywarshark 2.1
      16 December 2018 at 3:55 pm

      Good news, partial good news, smoke screen. We hope someone who understands can decode it.

  3. marty mars 3
    16 December 2018 at 12:17 pm

    Sadly desperate words and pleading are a waste of time now. If the boat is sinking do you bail or talk about bailing?
    If you don’t know what bailing is in this context go to the ‘how to get there” post.

  4. Pat 4
    16 December 2018 at 1:26 pm

    “The result will not be the breakthrough campaigners and some countries were hoping for, but will keep discussions alive on formulating key aspects of the implementation rules for the 2015 Paris accord.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/15/un-climate-change-talks-postpone-contentious-issues-with-draft-agreement

    “Climate Change Minister James Shaw, who was co-facilitating some of the talks, told reporters this morning that the newly agreed rulebook was “a breakthrough.”

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12177789

    Breakthrough or not?

    3 years after Paris, with emissions rising and a hopeful 12 years to cut drastically and ‘success’ is deferring for another year? ….even the EU could take lessons in can kicking from this lot.

    • greywarshark 4.1
      16 December 2018 at 1:48 pm

      2018 plus 12 years = 2030. At a new setting of protocols every thee years that gives three more meetings before the final one when it will be too late to bother about anything except gather all the resources to be saved in a high spot.

      Avoiding action by expenditure of time on preparation:

      • Pat 4.1.1
        16 December 2018 at 2:29 pm

        Good grief, I think youve discovered the origin of the IPCC model

        • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1
          16 December 2018 at 3:44 pm

          No, that would be the politics that controls the IPCC model. The politics that wants everything to continue as is despite all the evidence telling us that it can’t.

    • Ed 4.2
      17 December 2018 at 10:49 am

      Shaw is a disgrace
      Thunberg a heroine.

      Pity he didn’t heed these words of hers.

      “But to do that, we have to speak clearly, no matter how uncomfortable that may be. You only speak of green eternal economic growth because you are too scared of being unpopular. You only talk about moving forward with the same bad ideas that got us into this mess, even when the only sensible thing to do is pull the emergency brake. ”

      • Pat 4.2.1
        17 December 2018 at 11:00 am

        A disgrace?…possibly, that would depend on motivation. I suspect he is of the school of ‘positive thought’ and the consequent propensity for delusion….in any case it would appear it matters not in the grand scheme of things.

        • Ed 4.2.1.1
          17 December 2018 at 11:02 am

          If he only he would listen to Greta

          “And if solutions within the system are so impossible to find, then maybe we should change the system itself.”

          • Pat 4.2.1.1.1
            17 December 2018 at 11:10 am

            He (Shaw) however cannot make that change and those that can do not wish to

          • solkta 4.2.1.1.2
            17 December 2018 at 11:55 am

            Oh for fucks sake Ed, he is working his arse off just to get some progress. The alternative is to have all these countries put this in the too hard basket. Nobody is voting for your idiotic revolution so why not give some credit to those who are actually making a difference.

            • marty mars 4.2.1.1.2.1
              18 December 2018 at 9:26 am

              Ed is doing more than him by linking a lot to videos and stuff so he is a disgrace – where are HIS videos? Why can’t he put some up like ed does.

              • greywarshark …
                18 December 2018 at 9:45 am

                Oh snipy snippy! Seeing we can’t get anything needed done, or fast enough, by our elected representatives and the ones which didn’t get elected, we find a suitable subject on whom to vent our frustrations. Very good strategy and an example of role models for young people to watch and learn from.

                • solkta …
                  18 December 2018 at 9:55 am

                  Oh snippy snippy to your snippy snippy. Ed was just being a wanker and dumping on Shaw and deserves to be ridiculed.

                  • greywarshark …
                    18 December 2018 at 9:57 am

                    Cut him some slack. Or are you the Witch-blogger General?
                    He makes pompous, definitive statements. Well I read worse every day. Gives James regular stick and t’other terrible trolls
                    why don’t you.

  5. Timeforacupoftea 5
    16 December 2018 at 6:33 pm

    First we must depopulate + compulsory sterilisation – not until then will the world get back on its axis !

    • solkta 5.1
      16 December 2018 at 6:53 pm

      I think you need a lie down with that cup of tea.

    • tabletennis 5.2
      16 December 2018 at 8:33 pm

      their can be no talk about how to combat climate change without addressing population growth:
      Infinite growth is not possible on a finite planet. Basic logic. https://populationmatters.org/the-facts

      • Ed 5.2.1
        17 December 2018 at 10:56 am

        As Greta put so clearly.
        We must change the system.
        End capitalism.

        • DJ Ward 5.2.1.1
          17 December 2018 at 10:08 pm

          Have you ever noticed children bitching and moaning how the other child got more than them, or did less. You cannot get rid of capitalism, we are programmed with it. If you cannot make a profit you cannot get people to do anything. Because you go broke. Eventually because profits are banned you run out of other people’s money.

          Why don’t you make a shift to ethical Capitalism. You might find it doesn’t destroy everything like the extremes of socialism.

          • Robert Guyton 5.2.1.1.1
            18 December 2018 at 8:18 am

            The children you’ve seen “bitching and moaning” are the products of our selfish culture, and they’re not representative of all humans. There are and were cultures that eschew capitalism, so it’s clearly possible (and desirable) to do without it. The kinds of things you appear to support, DJ Ward, are the very things we could do without, if we hope to have a future here on the earth.

      • Robert Guyton 5.2.2
        18 December 2018 at 8:19 am

        Our farmers should stop “feeding the world”, that sort of thing, tabletennis?

    • Sabine 5.3
      17 December 2018 at 8:35 am

      compulsory vasectomies are better, they can be undone, you know just in case you wake up one day and realise you need a few more humans again.
      also it makes more sense as a women while she is pregnant wont make any other babies in the same time, the same can not be said for men, they can just go gallivanting about the planet father children like they there is no tomorrow.

      so yeah, compulsory vasectomies for all men. Cause sterilisations can’t really be undone.

      ” Female sterilisation is meant to be permanent. It can be reversed, but it’s a very difficult process that involves removing the blocked part of the fallopian tube and rejoining the ends. There’s no guarantee that you’ll be fertile again (able to get pregnant) after a sterilisation reversal.”
      https://www.google.com/search?q=can+sterilization+be+reversed&oq=can+sterilastion&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l5.8632j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

      • mikesh 5.3.1
        17 December 2018 at 4:13 pm

        Men can’t bear children. They can gallivant as much as they like but the numbers of children they can father is limited by the number of available women.

        • RedLogix 5.3.1.1
          17 December 2018 at 4:20 pm

          Absolutely correct.

          In essence any fertile woman who wants to can get pregnant. By contrast many males are sexually selected out by women and don’t reproduce.

          Geneticists tell us that overall we have twice as many female ancestors than male ones. This quite surprises people until they have a think about it.

          Sabine’s suggestion is quite ineffective; you’d have to sterilise at least 95% of the male population to make any difference whatsoever. For example post-WW2 Russia had a massive shortage of young men due their dreadful losses on the Eastern Front, but the population carried on growing with barely a blip.

          Worse still the ethics of all of this are appalling.

        • Sabine 5.3.1.2
          17 December 2018 at 9:45 pm

          and women can’t make babies on their own. They need men to do so. Without men no babies.

          seriously do you guys not know that? Do you really believe that women just spontaneously combust and be ‘preggers’ or if you prefer ‘with child’.

          • DJ Ward 5.3.1.2.1
            17 December 2018 at 10:46 pm

            Well you could get rid of men altogether if you want to blame men.

            Cloning. No men required.

          • RedLogix 5.3.1.2.2
            18 December 2018 at 7:11 am

            At an individual level this is true, but it’s simply not true on a population level. One male can impregnate a thousand females.

            While it’s true that women are generally more cautious and much more selective about who they have sex with, they’re still highly motivated to have babies. Your mass male sterilisation scheme would simply mean that the few fertile males left (there would have to be or the human race would go extinct) would be in very high demand. As social dystopia’s go I’m impressed with how many ways this one could go wrong.

            And imagine the outrage here if some male was to suggest mass enforced sterilisation of all women. But a woman can openly suggest the exact same be imposed on all men, and barely a ripple. Interesting.

            A male contraceptive pill would be an helpful alternative in that it would restore a degree of choice to individual men over their reproductive rights, but again no-one seems much interested in this either. Nor would it probably have much effect on population.

            Whichever way you look at it; it’s the number of fertile females who are the limiting factor in population growth. They are the scarce resource from a breeding perspective, not males.

            • Sabine 5.3.1.2.2.1
              18 December 2018 at 8:07 am

              No not all women are ‘highly motivated’ to have babies. Some women are so highly unmotivated they want their tubes tied and can’t get it done cause doctors says : Ah, but have you thought this over, are your sure, what if you change your mind, and oh it goes against my religious believes’ . many of these doctors are men.
              Some women really only have the children they have cause ‘God’s little blessings’ and women are to have all the children god can give them.
              Some women have children and then abandon them and treat them like shit, chances are all of these children were unwanted pregnancies.

              Babies cost money, need houses, need food, all of which women don’t have in surplus. I can tell you that there are many many women who do their darnerst to not have more babies that in the word of Mike Hoskins ‘ they can afford’. so women are already doing their part to prevent over population.

              Vasectomies are reversible.
              Sterilization not.
              And abortion is a criminal act for which a women in NZ needs to declare herself mentally ill in order to get it. Think about that.

              And we already have some male suggesting just that, in fact this conversation was just started by one. go figure.

              A male contraceptive? I have been waiting for this all my life, but while we don’t have an issue settling women with the pill and all its side effect, it seems that we are not so gung ho for men. So condoms and vasectomies it is. And still we get all sorts of excuses from men for not using these, Condoms – but it just does not feel the same, Vasectomies? Will i still be a man then?

              Again, i will point out that you want to put the onus on women being responsible for the world, while men wait for the male pill that they then will refuse to use, cause…..side effects? or something.

              As for forced sterilization, we already have a nice documented history of this having been done to women whom society deemed not good enough for reproduction, as if the men again were not involved.

              Fact is you need men and women for reproduction, and both should be held accountable in how they manage their fertility. I would also like to point out that women at some stage enter menopause, while men can still father children when they are 60+ .

              So no, if you want to control the population you need to work with men and women, unless you just want another tool to fuck women over, this time with their ability to breed the next generation.

            • greywarshark 5.3.1.2.2.2
              18 December 2018 at 8:33 am

              I think that it would be correct to say that females are highly motivated to have sex. The babies are not normally the main desire but that might be seen to change as their fertility declines in their thirties. There has been a big decline in births in NZ, and others will know what our fertility rate id an what our population increase ratio is.

              • RedLogix …
                18 December 2018 at 8:55 am

                It’s my simple observation that most women, not all, want to have children at some stage in their life. And indeed once the opportunity is lost through no choice of their own, they deeply mourn it.

                • greywarshark …
                  18 December 2018 at 9:56 am

                  RL
                  True but there is a relevant joke about sex and babies:
                  ‘A bus driver, helpfully lifting onto the bus a pram made for four babies and toddlers, said to the mother, “Gosh lady do you get twins every time.” She answered with a wry grin, “No, hundreds of times I get nothing.”

      • DJ Ward 5.3.2
        18 December 2018 at 12:56 pm

        Your compulsory vasectomy idea is bonkers.

        You would force childlessness on profound numbers of men.

        At what age would you sterilise them.
        When would they be permitted to do a reversal.
        At 40 when they have proven there suitability to parenting. Women Refuge Audited, crime free, illness free, high paying job, Labour party membership only?
        What are the rules?

        http://www.vasectomymedical.com/vasectomy-reversal-success-rates.html

        30% chance if your a good boy, at best is bonkers.

    • DJ Ward 5.4
      17 December 2018 at 10:28 pm

      Well depopulating sounds a bit ruthless.

      You could emigrate on mass to the Moon, Mars, Minor Planets, Asteroids, other Star Systems but I think that’s a long way off.

      You could have a disease outbreak. Maybe 20% or even 50% but mankinds pretty good at solving disease these days. It would likely need to be intentionaly released as well.

      You could have a war to end all wars. Our Third. But to get the numbers you would need the widespread use of Nukes, Chemical Weapons, or Nerve Agents. None of that options appealing.

      You could include, compulsory abortions, compulsory serialisation, infanticide but they probably won’t get much support.

      Actually NZ is an example where you can reduce population without harming people.
      Our Birth rate is 1.81 due to quality healthcare and female contraceptive choice, and abortion by choice.

      If you add the male pill to our NZ situation it should drop to around 1.4

      Countries with birth rates above 2.1 need help or be made to address there high figure.

      • RedLogix 5.4.1
        18 December 2018 at 9:27 am

        Yes. It’s amazing how many people here, those who purport to care for the poor and marginalised … seem to willingly embrace murderous agendas that imply the mass death of billions. It’s Joe Stalin’s famines all over again; totalitarian ideologies put ahead of actual human life.

        Yes climate change is a real and dangerous threat; but it’s not an excuse for cures that are most certainly worse.

  6. Sacha 6
    17 December 2018 at 10:20 am

    Do watch the video – she is so clear and unflinching in telling truth to power. Watch, out comfortable old men.

    • Ed 6.1
      17 December 2018 at 11:01 am

      Powerful stuff.
      Let’s hope the Extinction Rebellion and Yellow Vests movements are the start of people rising up in revolution against the capitalism death cult.
      I hope Greta is right when she says power lies with the people.
      My concern is that by the time we wrest control from the elite and the corporations it will be too late.
      And then , as space monkey says, the real power lies with the Eart.
      Nature bats last.

      • solkta 6.1.1
        17 December 2018 at 11:58 am

        They have democracy in France too you know. What is needed is to convince the majority to change. Your bullshit is not working to achieve that. The only alternative is violence. Violent people like you need to be opposed.

        • Ed 6.1.1.1
          17 December 2018 at 12:26 pm

          “What is needed is to convince the majority to change.”

          How do you that propose given the fact the media is owned by corporations determined to resist change?

          • solkta 6.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2018 at 12:39 pm

            You create or join a political party and campaign. The first Labour government was elected and they made huge changes. The media was owned by wealthy people back then too, but now you have the interwebs which makes sharing ideas easier.

            You simply bleating “media nasty”, “too hard”, “must use violence” is not going to convince many. Even if it were successful it can only lead to mega-death and dictatorship.

      • joe90 6.1.2
        17 December 2018 at 12:27 pm

        Yellow Vests movements are the start of people rising up in revolution against the capitalism death cult.

        Not if the movement allows itself to be hijacked by the likes of Dieudonné and his quenelle.

        Jérôme came though, from Haute-Savoie. On a white supremacist website, he showed me a map that tracks sickle cell disease rates in France. He says it proves Arab/African immigrants are replacing “pure” white French ppl. He didnt realize he was speaking to an Arab. #GiletsJaunes pic.twitter.com/6iBmTfKK9Y— Rym Momtaz ريم ممتاز (@RymMomtaz) December 15, 2018

    • DJ Ward 6.2
      17 December 2018 at 10:58 pm

      I guess May, Merkel, Jacinda, and thousands of other female politicians don’t count. Females also have move voters than men, so really your comment was a bit 1880s if your talking politics.

      The old men will die off. Then be replaced with new old men. Who are presently tolerable due to the sexual desirable quotient. What about good old men? Should they watch out.

  7. SaveNZ 7
    17 December 2018 at 12:44 pm

    Great speech!

    That 15 yo shows more wisdom than most of the government officials and advisors around the world.

    • Pat 7.1
      17 December 2018 at 6:30 pm

      It is no contest….there is no wisdom amongst Gov officials, advisors and vested interests, only self interest

  8. greywarshark 8
    17 December 2018 at 8:59 pm

    As I read this in a lifestyle magazine:
    If I was God for a day I would create an epically good cafe/restaurant right in the middle of the Tahuna beach sand dunes. The cafe would be open all day; think a super-cruisy DeVille on the beach. Then at night it morphs into an epic restaurant serving the best that our region can offer.

    I thought how it fits in these times to the verse in WH Auden 1 September 1939:

    Faces along the bar
    Cling to their average day:
    The lights must never go out,
    The music must always play,
    All the conventions conspire
    To make this fort assume
    The furniture of home;
    Lest we should see where we are,
    Lost in a haunted wood,
    Children afraid of the night
    Who have never been happy or good.

    • Rosemary McDonald 8.1
      18 December 2018 at 12:39 am

      • greywarshark 8.1.1
        18 December 2018 at 8:54 am

        rosemary
        I looked at the words for the first song that came on – The Sad Cafe – and thought they are very expressive. So am putting them up. Thanks.

        Eagles Lyrics
        “The Sad Cafe”

        Out in the shiny night, the rain
        was softly falling
        The tracks that ran down the boulevard had
        all been washed away

        Out of the silver light, the past came softly calling
        And I remember the times we spent
        inside the Sad Cafe

        Oh, it seemed like a holy place,
        protected by amazing grace
        And we would sing right out loud, the
        things we could not say
        We thought we could change this world
        with words like “love” and “freedom”
        We were part of the lonely crowd
        Inside the Sad Cafe

        Oh, expecting to fly,
        we would meet on that beautiful shore in the sweet by and by

        Some of their dreams came true,
        some just passed away
        And some of them stayed behind
        inside the Sad Cafe.

        The clouds rolled in and hid that shore
        Now that Glory Train, it don’t stop here no more
        Now I look at the years gone by,
        and wonder at the powers that be.
        I don’t know why fortune smiles on some
        and let’s the rest go free

        Maybe the time has drawn the faces I recall
        But things in this life change very slowly,
        if they ever change at all
        no use in asking why,
        it just turned out that way
        So meet me at midnight baby
        inside the Sad Cafe.
        Why don’t you meet me at midnight, babe,
        inside the Sad Cafe.

        Writer(s): DON HENLEY, GLENN LEWIS FREY, JOHN DAVID SOUTHER, JOE WALSH

        https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/eagles/thesadcafe.html

  9. Mark 9
    17 December 2018 at 9:51 pm

    “Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people to continue making enormous amounts of money. Our biosphere is being sacrificed so that rich people in countries like mine can live in luxury. It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few.”

    This is exactly the crux of the matter.

    • DJ Ward 9.1
      17 December 2018 at 11:34 pm

      Interesting to see what Luxury is.
      Wouldn’t in not just be a few, but rather a few billion.

      Only a person who has never lived without Luxury could possibly not want to have it.
      A person raised in poverty would not wish poverty on others, and sees simple things in life as Luxury. What is Luxury.

      Nice rhetoric but the real world is far more complex than an attack on the rich. Africa was plagued by bad leaders that halted politics, Asia is plagued by population that hamstrings politics, Religion protects itself, citizens support exploitation of national assets for short term personal gain, voting in those that promise the most. America votes to keep its Luxury. So do we, even if its about lifting children out of poverty, which is Luxury for many.

      I’m guessing the 15 year old has little clue about how vast the last 100 years has been in the pace of change. Nobody could have planed for our present circumstance. Politics simply got steamrolled by progress, and democracy’s fault, the majority can oppress the minority. IE the voters greed overcomes rational thinking.

      • Sacha 9.1.1
        17 December 2018 at 11:43 pm

        Your waffling here is her opposite. I’d say she knows exactly what she is talking about – and that is the crucial next couple of decades, not the excuses old men derive from our past.

        • RedLogix 9.1.1.1
          18 December 2018 at 7:17 am

          Still no-one is going to vote for poverty either.

          • Pat 9.1.1.1.1
            18 December 2018 at 8:43 am

            People vote for poverty all the time (if only by their actions)…especially when the only alternative is no existence at all.

            • RedLogix 9.1.1.1.1.1
              18 December 2018 at 8:53 am

              Only if you take choice away from them; and that’s the critical point where the radical left keeps sabotaging the climate change movement. We keep conflating a real science and engineering problem with an agenda to “kill capitalism”.

              Quite rightly the rest of the voting population, including moderate lefties like me, listen to this and think you’re going too far. It creates a fertile ground for suspicion that the climate change deniers and fossil carbon corporates have readily exploited.

              • Pat …
                18 December 2018 at 10:15 am

                “We keep conflating a real science and engineering problem with an agenda to “kill capitalism”.

                Not at all…indeed most voices dont advocate any such thing (radical left or not) especially the scientific community, rather they seek meaningful action.
                However the ‘choice’ will ultimately be lost in any case.

                Curiously 70% of emissions are created by the lifestyles of the wealthiest 20% so ‘poverty’ is not necessarily a requirement.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                18 December 2018 at 11:46 am

                Only if you take choice away from them

                People can only truly have a choice if they have the information available to them and the skills necessary to interpret that information. That’s a large part as to why I keep saying that people should be in work or training.

                We keep conflating a real science and engineering problem with an agenda to “kill capitalism”.

                Wouldn’t that be the right-wing as the Left try to put in place policies and practices based upon the ‘real science and engineering’.

                If it does have the effect of destroying capitalism then perhaps you need to accept that capitalism doesn’t match with the ‘real science and engineering’.

                Quite rightly the rest of the voting population, including moderate lefties like me, listen to this and think you’re going too far.

                What are extreme policies?

                • RedLogix …
                  18 December 2018 at 12:56 pm

                  If it does have the effect of destroying capitalism then perhaps you need to accept that capitalism doesn’t match with the ‘real science and engineering’.

                  Given that capitalism … for all of it’s obvious shortcomings … is still the most effective system we’ve ever evolved for eliminating absolute poverty and giving individuals a degree of choice in their lives none of our ancestors ever enjoyed, I would argue that no-one is going to let you kill it.

                  What is much more likely to work, and aligns with how all organic systems evolve, is that we take what works and improve on it small step at a time until it is better. I know that feels boringly pragmatic DtB … but it’s the only reliable way to work with complex systems.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    18 December 2018 at 1:23 pm

                    Given that capitalism … for all of it’s obvious shortcomings … is still the most effective system we’ve ever evolved for eliminating absolute poverty

                    From my reading of history we didn’t have absolute poverty until we had capitalism and the exploitation of the many to enrich the few.

                    and giving individuals a degree of choice in their lives none of our ancestors ever enjoyed

                    Under capitalism people’s choices actually decrease because they have to work to make someone else richer.

                    What is much more likely to work, and aligns with how all organic systems evolve, is that we take what works and improve on it small step at a time until it is better.

                    And that’s not going to happen if we keep telling ourselves that the present system is working despite all the evidence that its not.

                    • RedLogix …
                      18 December 2018 at 1:39 pm

                      From my reading of history we didn’t have absolute poverty until we had capitalism and the exploitation of the many to enrich the few.

                      Your reading of history is bunk. Maybe in some pre-agricultural hunter-gatherer societies was everyone some level of idealistic psuedo-equality, all united at a subsistence-level poverty … but no-one was typing on the internet.

                      Under capitalism people’s choices actually decrease because they have to work to make someone else richer.

                      If you could ask the vast majority of humans who ever lived before the end of the 1900’s just what real ‘choices’ they enjoyed. The answer would be SFA. Most people lived on the modern equivalent of a few dollars a day.

                      Maybe you need to get out of your mother’s basement and travel a bit in the real world DtB. You worry me.

      • greywarshark 9.1.2
        18 December 2018 at 8:42 am

        DJ Ward
        You have had a breakthrough brainwave and have finally tumbled to what we are on about on this blog. Now next step you can take is….?

        • DJ Ward 9.1.2.1
          18 December 2018 at 10:03 am

          More realism.

          More ideas and solutions that don’t destroy things but try and improve things with better outcomes.

          Addressing injustice with practical solutions.

          Persecution for past wrongs, using todays thinking and judging the past with it is stupid. It doesn’t fix tomorrow.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.3
        18 December 2018 at 11:39 am

        Interesting to see what Luxury is.

        Anything above and beyond what’s needed to maintain individual life and society.

        There are tribes in the world today that don’t have all the mod cons but they don’t think that they’re living in poverty. Each has a place to live, clothes necessary for the environment and food to eat.

        Now, in our society we actually need some of the mod-cons such as PCs and the internet.

        But we don’t need a car each so that would be a luxury. We don’t need chocolate so that too is a luxury.

        Only a person who has never lived without Luxury could possibly not want to have it.

        But are they willing to accept that they don’t need it?

        Africa was plagued by bad leaders that halted politics

        That and the exploitative West as they forced free-markets on them for loans that they didn’t really need.

        America votes to keep its Luxury.

        Does it?

        Or is it that the people don’t actually have a choice?

        Oh, wait, the US has already been proven an oligarchy. NZ operates the same way so that’s probably true of NZ as well.

        So do we, even if its about lifting children out of poverty, which is Luxury for many.

        Lifting children out of poverty is not a luxury. Fact is that a society shouldn’t have any poverty.

        Poverty is a function of rich people at the top making the decisions that the majority are left out of.

  10. Angela 10
    17 December 2018 at 10:34 pm

    Hi Greta. I live in New Zealand and I am 53 years old. When I was 9 years old I remember we were being taught about conservation and caring for the world. But it seems it’s all been talk. You are right. Countries measure successes in economic ways only. Thank you for giving your voice to this issue in the hope that we still have time. Kia kaha Greta. (Stay strong) Arohanui, Angela.

  11. César Valdivieso 11
    24 December 2018 at 11:48 pm

    Greetings friends of thestandard.org.nz. Talking about stealing the children’s future , here is a proposal that might be of interest to you:

    A SELF SUFFICIENT VIRTUAL CITY AS A MODEL TO BUILD A SUSTAINABLE REAL WORLD

    Despite the high quality of life that some of the so-called developed nations have achieved, the truth is that the world, considered as a group of countries located in a fragile and geographically limited biosphere, is threatened with extinction due to human conflicts and the depredation of the environment.
    Notwithstanding the good and very important actions taken by groups and individuals in favor of a better world, deterioration at all levels continues to increase dangerously.
    After more than thirty years dedicated to these matters, and since “an image is worth a thousand words” we have come up with an alternative strategy, which consists of designing a self-sufficient and sustainable model city that has all the characteristics of infrastructure and organization inherent to the peaceful and sustainable society that we want for ourselves and our descendants, whose representation in the form of scale models, animated series, feature films, video games and theme parks, would constitute a model to follow to generate the necessary changes.
    The prototype that we present has some characteristics that are opposed, sometimes in a radical way, to the religious, economic, political and educational traditions and customs that have been transmitted from generation to generation, yet are the causes of the aforementioned problems, and therefore must be transformed.
    If you are interested in knowing about this project, or even participating in it, we invite you to visit our website https://elmundofelizdelfuturo.blogspot.com/ (written in Spanish and English), where we are working in that sense.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.