Extinction Rebellion

[GUBRATS]

13 minutes ago, verbatim said:

It really isn't that simple at all, there is nothing simple about this. We're currently using 1.7 earths worth of resources every year, so in order to have balance and use 1 years worth of resource every year we need to reduce resource use by 40%, which if your suggesting population is the issue means a population reduction of 40%. Let's say you manage to persuade everyone to stop making babies straight away, with death rates of 50m per year that means it'll be 60 years until were back to an equilibrium!

I'm not saying population growth isn't an issue, it's just one of a number of very complicated factors. Capitalism has been a hugely beneficial way of increasing living standards and development around the world, but in doing so has consumed and destroyed more the the finite planet can cope with. We (as in everybody, myself included I'm not finger pointing and blaming others) need to work together to (quickly) adapt our systems to consume far less and live sustainably. 

The XR protests seem to be pointing that out, to raise awareness in the general population and to pressure governments to accept the issue and start acting. No individual actions from Emma Thompson or anyone else is going to sort this out, it needs to be a systemic change accepted and supported by all. There is nothing to be achieved by calling the protesters hypocritical, that's simply shooting the messenger.

Yes , but the more the population increases the more we will consume quicker , the longer it will take to reduce the amount of carbon we use , the planet is finite , the more people on it the quicker we will use up its resources , I'm not saying a ' Thanos type cull ' is required , just a end to the increases we are currently seeing , to deny that is madness , yes we have choices , we revert the whole world to pre industrial revolution fuedal society , or we give science a chance to catch up , to do that we need to stop producing more people , it IS that simple 

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Makes no odds unless the plane was full of people going to a climate change protest whose attendees all wanted zero carbon emissions by 2025.  Then they'd all be hypocrites!

Exactly , so she isn't a hypocrite , yes if her seat had been empty the plane might have used a tenners worth less of fuel , but again ATM there is no ' green ' alternative to fast intercontinental travel so that will have to continue for the time being , until Scotty sorts out his ' transporter ' system 

[Phil]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

to do that we need to stop producing more people , it IS that simple 

Agreed, and probably the main way of doing that is to lift 3rd world countries out of poverty, enable them to keep the fruits of their rich resources, enable social security and healthcare services so they don’t need lots of children to keep them in their old age, lots of children because a high percentage of them die of preventable causes, be absolutely ruthless in rooting out and removing corruption in these countries, basically get rid of capitalism. 

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

Agreed, and probably the main way of doing that is to lift 3rd world countries out of poverty, enable them to keep the fruits of their rich resources, enable social security and healthcare services so they don’t need lots of children to keep them in their old age, lots of children because a high percentage of them die of preventable causes, be absolutely ruthless in rooting out and removing corruption in these countries, basically get rid of capitalism. 

Agree with all the first bits , unfortunately you won't get rid of capitalism , and socialism can be just as corrupt 

[Niels]

51 minutes ago, verbatim said:

So what did you mean?

Niels suggested flying in got more publicity than Skype would have, your post "absolutely" suggested you agreed. A major point of the protests was publicity so it seems she achieved what she set out to do so I assumed you thought she made the right choice.

Sorry I meant publicity for herself which in my view is a prime motivation. There are lots of people who help and support this cause that we never hear about. 

It's interesting people are asking if it would have made a difference if she had taken her seat. But the whole ethos of the campaign is that every little helps. So people wouldn't say to a person who chose not to fly one day a month "it won't make a difference". 

 

[gingerjon]

9 hours ago, Niels said:

Sorry I meant publicity for herself which in my view is a prime motivation. There are lots of people who help and support this cause that we never hear about. 

It's interesting people are asking if it would have made a difference if she had taken her seat. But the whole ethos of the campaign is that every little helps. So people wouldn't say to a person who chose not to fly one day a month "it won't make a difference". 

 

What benefit to her is there through this publicity? Cos it seems quite an odd way to go about it.

Also, if you could answer the questions about what outcry there was about her kids’ schooling and why that is remotely relevant...

[gingerjon]

10 hours ago, Phil said:

Agreed, and probably the main way of doing that is to lift 3rd world countries out of poverty, enable them to keep the fruits of their rich resources, enable social security and healthcare services so they don’t need lots of children to keep them in their old age, lots of children because a high percentage of them die of preventable causes, be absolutely ruthless in rooting out and removing corruption in these countries, basically get rid of capitalism. 

Capitalism ... socialism ... meh.

As we’ve covered before there is one simple trick that has been shown to reduce population growth to what might be imagined to be more manageable levels whilst also improving community health.

You prioritise educating girls.

[GUBRATS]

41 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Capitalism ... socialism ... meh.

As we’ve covered before there is one simple trick that has been shown to reduce population growth to what might be imagined to be more manageable levels whilst also improving community health.

You prioritise educating girls.

Spot on , but as we then know religion then rears its ugly head , primarily the ones that treat women as 2nd class human beings 

[Niels]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

What benefit to her is there through this publicity? Cos it seems quite an odd way to go about it.

Also, if you could answer the questions about what outcry there was about her kids’ schooling and why that is remotely relevant...

The entertainment business relies on Publicity. 

In the context of her views it is an example of previous hypocrisy. 

You know all of this . 

[Vambo]

Whilst a nation's 'success' is measured by economic growth, productivity levels and the encouragement of unthinking consumerism there will be no halt to this madness. Madness is what it is. What other word best describes how we treat this planet? Our home.

Degrowth is what is needed but it won't happen. I have zero hopes that any real change will happen.

The people at the top of XR are already developing business links. Another disappointment. Another greenwash.

When a system relies on infinite growth with finite resources there is only one way it ends.

 

[Bob8]

21 hours ago, GeordieSaint said:

It’s a poor argument accusing her of hypocrisy; normally done to ignore the sound arguments Thompson and the Rebellion are saying.

Flying less doesn’t mean not flying at all; something which is impractical right now. And this is the point some people who ridicule the likes of Thompson and the Rebellion miss; it’s not about banning all forms of transport etc right now. It’s about doing what you have suggested and it needs known people like Thompson leading the fight. 

Flying first class is worse. It is not a good look.  

Annoyingly, it does not make the protest wrong nor let people like me (or Emma Thompson) off the hook, which has been the implication. 

[Shadow]

15 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Flying first class is worse. It is not a good look.  

Annoyingly, it does not make the protest wrong nor let people like me (or Emma Thompson) off the hook, which has been the implication. 

How is flying first class worse?

If anything it's the mass market cheap flights that are the ones to limit. A rapid mass transit train system acorss Europe that could get you to the south of Spain in half a day would eliminate a huge number of flights at a fraction of the costs.

 

[Bob8]

Just now, Shadow said:

How is flying first class worse?

If anything it's the mass market cheap flights that are the ones to limit. A rapid mass transit train system acorss Europe that could get you to the south of Spain in half a day would eliminate a huge number of flights at a fraction of the costs.

 

It is arguable, but cramming people in is more efficient. First class also counts hugely to making the flight economically viable. 

That said, I am not sure of this assertion and I know how the forum has no place for assertions without a solid, evidence based backing    

[Shadow]

5 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

It is arguable, but cramming people in is more efficient. First class also counts hugely to making the flight economically viable. 

That said, I am not sure of this assertion and I know how the forum has no place for assertions without a solid, evidence based backing    

There's no place on the Internet for unfounded assertions. It would be madness if people started doing that. 

[Saintslass]

14 hours ago, gingerjon said:

You prioritise educating girls.

How does that stop population growth?  Last I heard, it took boys AND girls to make a baby.

[gingerjon]

8 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

How does that stop population growth?  Last I heard, it took boys AND girls to make a baby.

Look it up. It works.

[GUBRATS]

12 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

How does that stop population growth?  Last I heard, it took boys AND girls to make a baby.

Because uneducated girls think they need a man to be worthwhile 

[Saintslass]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Because uneducated girls think they need a man to be worthwhile 

Really?  And you know this how?

[Saintslass]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Look it up. It works.

You mean shifting the responsibility on to women?  That works?  Oh, ok.  How convenient for men!

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Saintslass said:

Really?  And you know this how?

We are talking generally about 3rd world countries where their social structures and religion treats women quite often as second class citizens , do you disagree ?

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

You mean shifting the responsibility on to women?  That works?  Oh, ok.  How convenient for men!

It isn't shifting the responsibility it is empowering women to make their own choices in life , rather than their parents or social/religious pressures 

[Saintslass]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

It isn't shifting the responsibility it is empowering women to make their own choices in life , rather than their parents or social/religious pressures 

Oh, I'm all for educating women and girls, absolutely, although I think you'll find being educated makes no difference to faith or indeed a woman's wish to be involved with men.  I still don't see how that would impact population growth.  Even educated women want children you know.

[Saintslass]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

We are talking generally about 3rd world countries where their social structures and religion treats women quite often as second class citizens , do you disagree ?

Yes, I disagree.  You are sounding quite imperialistic in your generalisation there actually!  

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Oh, I'm all for educating women and girls, absolutely, although I think you'll find being educated makes no difference to faith or indeed a woman's wish to be involved with men.  I still don't see how that would impact population growth.  Even educated women want children you know.

Yes , but how many ?

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Yes, I disagree.  You are sounding quite imperialistic in your generalisation there actually!  

So you don't believe that some women , particularily in the 3rd world come under pressure to marry who their parents want , or are subjugated by religion or social pressure , quite often resulting in large families ? , The same happens in this country but quite often for different reasons 

Do you believe the world can continue to increase its human population indefinitely ?