Jump to content

Extinction Rebellion

EssexRL

Recommended Posts

JohnM

JohnM

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

Some people are listening and doing some things.  The science suggests that we are currently not doing enough.  Sadly we can't afford to keep putting things off (Goves bill is delayed until brexit is settled, Trump delays US action for a few more years, etc)

Well she won't be able to enjoy some of the things you and I would take for granted.  

Don't agree.  For example,  what things won't she be able to do that you and I would take for granted?

also, let's see some big results from the biggest offenders. Not in pledges, not in percentage terms but in absolute terms. 

Lets also see  the topic decoupled from the protesters demands for a socio-economic-political New Jerusalem. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Shadow

Shadow

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, JohnM said:

For example,  what things won't she be able to do that you and I would take for granted?

Squander the earth's resources, pollute the oceans and chop down rainforests.

I'm not suggesting it's a bad thing, mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kiyan

kiyan

Posted
Posted
On ‎22‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 11:18, M j M said:

FFS. People should pressure the UK government because they are OUR government. Sitting around saying "other countries are worse" is pointless distracting whataboutism. People should control what they can control, influence what they can influence. We influence our government and they have some influence, albeit reducing because of our current position of international embarrassment, over other nations.

Our country has been responsible for much more historic emissions than China, which got us here in the first place, so should be at the very forefront of tackling this issue. Instead, the current administration, freed from their obligations to the LibDems, have massively cut back on schemes to reduce carbon emissions.

The irony of talking about "whataboutism", during the peak of the industrial revolution GB's yearly C02 production was less than the currently weekly Chinese  figure!

So sure it is all our fault! 

Is there any country in the world who  blames itself for all the faults and refuses to celebrate  what it has done well, other  than the UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vambo

Vambo

Posted
Posted

The damage is already done.

What we need to do is learn from it and stop doing more damage. We could always stop buying plastic sleeved tat from China for example.

But don't worry... businesses are already taking control of the narrative and we will soon be saved by the new 'Green Capitalism. It's the same as the old Capitalism but now wears a thin green veil of respectability. 

Most people are too selfish to actually change anyway and whilst there is money to be made.....

 

The%20Warriors%2060.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tim2

tim2

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Stop buying Chinese tat? But.. But... But then the forum's eco warriors would have nothing to access the forum with... 

We could always buy more of our things from somewhere closer to reduce air and sea miles on our goods. Oh, hang on...

"I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, M j M said:

The MOS engages with the issues in that bar room bore way of theirs.

 

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Nowhere near as pleasant as this. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6993173/Actress-Emma-Thompson-spotted-carbon-spewing-BA-plane-jetting-New-York.html

Seems to please their readers.

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
M j M

M j M

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

 

Seems to please their readers.

The Mail knows how to grind their gears that's for sure. Although many people on the right of the spectrum do seem to get outraged at the most trivial of things that other people get up to. It can't be healthy being so snowflakey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve May

Steve May

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, M j M said:

The MOS engages with the issues in that bar room bore way of theirs.

_106799051_mail-1.jpg

I’m not sure I see what the argument is. 

Are the Mail on Sunday suggesting that quantum mechanics is wrong because Emma Thompson got on an aeroplane?

The vibrational modes of CO2 molecules don’t give a about Emma Thompson, the Mail on Sunday or, in fact, politics at all. 

English, Irish, Brit, Yorkshire, European.  Citizen of the People's Republic of Yorkshire, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom and the European Union.  Critical of all it.  Proud of all it.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niels

Niels

Posted
Posted
On 05/05/2019 at 08:23, M j M said:

The MOS engages with the issues in that bar room bore way of theirs.

_106799051_mail-1.jpg

I think it is important to raise this kind of hypocrisy. People enjoy similar links about Nigel Farage at al so I don't think we can be have one rule for one etc.

I think the issue is that it is always easier to be moral and preach about what is right or wrong when there is the means to behave differently. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Niels said:

People enjoy similar links about Nigel Farage at al so I don't think we can be have one rule for one etc.

And what links is that?  Farage is in the climate denial camp for one?

Or are you talking about the man of the people using private jets and not saying who paid for it?  Cause that is not similar in the slightest?

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niels

Niels

Posted
Posted
Just now, Bedford Roughyed said:

And what links is that?  Farage is in the climate denial camp for one?

Or are you talking about the man of the people using private jets and not saying who paid for it?  Cause that is not similar in the slightest?

That's sort of the point I am making. 

Because Farage (who I used purely as an example) is a climate denier you are content to write about his travel excesses. Yet it is wrong for the Mail to highlight Emma Thomson because she says the right things despite behaving very differently to how she preaches. 

I don't have any axe to grind on this but I think we have to be consistent. Otherwise we will just have the right sneering at Emma Thomson and the left at Nigel Farage. Then it looks like political point scoring as opposed to genuine climate concern.  Then people down the middle don't trust either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bob8

Bob8

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Niels said:

I think it is important to raise this kind of hypocrisy. People enjoy similar links about Nigel Farage at al so I don't think we can be have one rule for one etc.

I think the issue is that it is always easier to be moral and preach about what is right or wrong when there is the means to behave differently. 

 

 

These protests make raise issues in which people like me, affluent, car owners who regularly fly, are the baddies. I do not like being the baddy and it is natural to be defensive. But, it does miss the point. Emma Thompson May well be worse than me, but in the bigger picture, that is irrelevant. 

I see the point with Farage. I would suggest the difference is Farage is specifically blaming specific groups and promising simple solutions he does not believe him.

"You clearly have never met Bob8 then, he's like a veritable Bryan Ferry of RL." - Johnoco 19 Jul 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Niels said:

Because Farage (who I used purely as an example) is a climate denier you are content to write about his travel excesses.

His travel excesses are not written about because of a climate aspect or his climate change denial, its written about because he is a politician accepting gifts from who knows?  It's written about because he rails against the elites before hoping on a private jet.  It's written about because he was claiming to be poor only the other year but now appears to of overcome his cashflow issues.  

 

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saintslass

Saintslass

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Steve May said:

I’m not sure I see what the argument is. 

Are the Mail on Sunday suggesting that quantum mechanics is wrong because Emma Thompson got on an aeroplane?

The vibrational modes of CO2 molecules don’t give a about Emma Thompson, the Mail on Sunday or, in fact, politics at all. 

It's all about practising what you preach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gingerjon

gingerjon

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

It's all about practising what you preach.

Fly less does not equal don't fly.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niels

Niels

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

His travel excesses are not written about because of a climate aspect or his climate change denial, its written about because he is a politician accepting gifts from who knows?  It's written about because he rails against the elites before hoping on a private jet.  It's written about because he was claiming to be poor only the other year but now appears to of overcome his cashflow issues.  

 

Yes all of this is arguable. But so is the article in the Mail writing about the hypocrisy of Emma Thomson. 

We can't apply different standards or arguments purely because one is on the "right" side of the argument and the other isn't.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed

Posted
Posted
Just now, Niels said:

But so is the article in the Mail writing about the hypocrisy of Emma Thomson. 

What hypocrisy?

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.