Extinction Rebellion

[Oldjohnw]

Whose views would these citizenry actually represent? Those who thought the same as them? Or would somehow, magically, everyone think the same?

[roubaixtuesday]

Whose views would these citizenry actually represent? Those who thought the same as them? Or would somehow, magically, everyone think the same?

Again, these questions are answered in the quote above

The process will be designed to ensure that the Assembly reflects the whole country in terms of characteristics such as gender, age, ethnicity, education level and geography. Assembly members will hear balanced information from experts and those most affected by the emergency. Members will speak openly and honestly in small groups with the aid of professional facilitators. Together they will work through their differences and draft and vote on recommendations.

An actual example was in Ireland:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens% ... y_(Ireland)

And again, I'm not advocating for XR here, just trying to reflect the facts of their position. Which seems surprisingly difficult!

[niggle]

Individual action such as going vegan, getting rid of the car, stopping flying, etc., etc. are of course worth doing but will not make the necessary difference, the threat to humanity and the entire ecosystem is at least as severe as the threat we faced in 1939. The 1940s generation's defeat of the Nazis and Imperial Japan in under 6 years compares to the XR target get to net zero CO2 by 2025. The solutions exist and are technically attainable but to enact them will take a level of state and international effort and organisation on a par with that of the WW2 war effort. However right now the political will and effort is totally lacking, so as a population we need to demand our government(s) enact a grand plan. The government(s) can only take the necessary actions, pool the resources required and enforce the necessary hardships with the population's consent and support, but to get that support the population needs to be told the truth, which is why XR and the School Strikes for Climate are trying (and broadly succeeding) in getting the truth across to the population. The next step is on us all to be persistent and vociferous in our demands for action. The theme has to be civic responsibility to future generations: will we be able to look our grandchildren in the eye in the decades to come?

[niggle]

For the deniers and doubters: https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... -passes-99

[Vorpal]

For the deniers and doubters: https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... -passes-99

One paragraph in this article stood out for me...

“This paper should finally stop climate change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is part of a natural climate cycle. This paper shows the truly stark difference between regional and localised changes in climate of the past and the truly global effect of anthropogenic greenhouse emissions,” said Mark Maslin, professor of climatology at University College London.

Denying climate change has nothing to do with science. It has to do with money, money, and money.

And for a few folks, it has to do with God. https://www.dw.com/en/god-and-the-earth ... a-47781433 They don't care whether 97% of scientists or 99% or even, 100% of scientists 'believe' in climate change. They believe in God, and that is enough to counter anything.

[Tangled Metal]

More likely denial is about ideology and religion than money. Most fervent deniers aren't the money men but the political right and religious right. It's too easy to lump them as being about money.

[Tangled Metal]

Professional facilitators? Interesting.

Sorry but I don't see how this is any better. Our representative politics doesn't work now but that is more down to the party politics and lack of politicians acting based on constituency consultation. They can listen to constituents but then vote to their own conscience or on party political lines. The old idea (if it actually existed) of constituents, country then party doesn't apply these days.

Personal view is ER are about the disturbance than real progress. The idea of them getting the message across is not real. The message if global warming and the issues is already out there public have been reading or listening to that message for longer than ER have been in existence. We listen then get on with their lives. Public needs change from above and that happens through representative politics and the vote.

[Cyril Haearn]

Please to call it XR to avoid confusion with Elizabeth Regina

[Oldjohnw]

Politicians - or citizens assembly members - can listen to their public. The public will not be of the same view as each other. So whose view will be represented? At least half will be disappointed and feel let down.

[kwackers]

Politicians - or citizens assembly members - can listen to their public. The public will not be of the same view as each other. So whose view will be represented? At least half will be disappointed and feel let down.

Why half? What makes you think that?

This isn't brexit.
What percentage of the public do you think might say we need to do something about global warming?
I'd hazard a guess that it's a lot more than half.
And given it involves them listening to experts, having access to research and having it explained to them I think there's a fairly good chance it'll be way more.

Part of the important bit about the assembly is that it isn't just random folk off the street simply asked to give their opinion when they haven't got a clue.
It's more like a trial. Here are the facts, here's what's suggested, what do you think?

Sounds pretty good to me.

[Cugel]

(snip)

I could do a lot more - even if I'm not ready to glue myself up somewhere in London....

So what more could you do that's practical? And why don't you do it?

Like you, I've spent some portion of my life being profligate with the consumables. I didn't really start in earnest until I was 39 - no car, no central heating, no money to buy much other than a bike and the occasional new tyre of chain. I made up for it a bit in my 50s, although I've flown very little and not at all since 2004.

Recently the ladywife et moi bought a house with ground source heating, solar panels and state of the art insulation - along with a hybrid PHEV used in electric mode 97% of the time. We also minimize the meat to about once a month (perhaps twice some months). And various other small things.

These are insufficient and were done mostly out of a personal sense of economy with only a lucky nod to the XR concerns. Still, we will go on trying to decrease the carbon footprint as well as the consumption of stuff that won't last at least two lifetimes, ignoring fashion and must-haves such as endless gizmos, new clothes or the latest thingamajig. I like long-lasting things and detest shopping, see?

We'll spend money trying to do the above - certainly on a bigger solar array and perhaps even a windmill, longer term (they're expensive; we'll need to save more for a windmill). Hopefully these will last and last and be of use to someone else when we drop dead of smugness.

As with cycling in bad weather, the hardest part is" getting out the door" - i.e. starting. Once you have momentum, it becomes easier; hopefully one of those useful obsessive-compulsive modes. I've acquired an obsession with becoming less of a burden on the planet and it's current ecologies. I wish everyone else would too - and perhaps the XR demos will encourage them. On the other hand, people have a habit of reacting against those who suggest a better way, as their secret guilts or greedy addictions are stimulated. Personally I find it hard enough persuading myself to do better rather than worse.

Cugel

[Cugel]

So, what do XR want? No one knows. Who will make up the 'citizens assembly' nutters, or democratically elected people? We have a Parliament that we elected whats wrong with that? ER would be more effective if they espoused clear objectives, as it is its unclear except that they garner attention through disruption which alienates rather than persuades.

Al

Yes, yes; but when you're not avidly voting for the Tory Trots, you're doing your reactionary bigot act. Why should we take your baldy opinion on this matter any more seriously than we take any of your other regurgitated Borisgraph opinions?

On the other hand, you will surely find "a like minded friend" - or even two - to agree with you, at-the-pub-after-four-pints style.

Cugel

[Tangled Metal]

Please to call it XR to avoid confusion with Elizabeth Regina

Only if the header is changed to Xtinction Rebellion.

[661-Pete]

Please to call it XR to avoid confusion with Elizabeth Regina

Oh, I don't know. Might be great if Her Maj were to see the light and join in! I can just picture her having to be gently prised off after glueing herself to the street in Whitehall, or wherever. Would Phil the Greek join in?

[Tangled Metal]

So AIUI the government had set up an inquiry if independent experts to determine how, when it's realistically possible to get to zero carbon emissions like ER want by 2025. They had it sitting, taking evidence before ER appeared. The government got the advice, published it and legally committed to it. The first country to do that btw. Backed by the opposition too I believe.

So what would the assemblies really add? Would the assemblies not just review the same evidence? What if they came up with the same or very similar answer? Do you really think ER would stick to the outcome if it didn't give the result they wanted or expected?

Sorry but it's a gimmick to give cover for unreconstructed green activists who won't be happy unless the whole economic model is torn apart. I'm more than sceptical about it all. I'd like to be proven wrong though because at the end of the day climate change exists and the sooner it's managed the better. I just don't see how their approach will achieve anything significant.