Thread by @clim8resistance

A long read from 2014 by me on Extinction Rebellion mouthpiece and 'thinker', Rupert Read.

It is a response to Read's angry rant against 'libertarianism', and against the public.

climate-resistance.org/2014/06/why-do…

It shows that Read doesn't know what he's talking about.

At all.

And it shows that academics are often the category of person that has the weakest grasp on the world, and convince only themselves that they understand it the best.

At the time, it was hard to understand Read's palpable anger and incoherence.

But a few years later, I stumbled across the answer.

Read had donated ~£50,000 of his own money that year to the Green Party, to support his own election to the European Parliament.

But he failed to win enough votes. A remarkable failure, given that EU elections are PR, not FPTP, and green politics was seemingly in the ascendant.

Read turned his ire against the stupid voter, and the stupid 'ideologues' and the stupid 'ideology' and the stupid 'millionaires' that he held responsible for his loss -- of cash and of the seat. People were so stupid, he claimed, all they wanted to do was go shopping.

And stupid people who only want to go shopping vote UKIP, obviously.

Rather than reflect on his own failure, he sought to blame others.

This is the DNA of extinction rebellion: the self-entitled narcissist does not believe he needs to negotiate with others to assert his will.

Extinction Rebellion do not believe they have to win the argument. They do not take part in debates with people who disagree with them. Their contempt for others allows them to assert themselves over others. It's as obvious in their actions as it is in their "philosophy".

Read's naked contempt for people gives is a clue that there is a problem in academia, that there is a problem with the environmental perspective and agenda, and there is a problem with the relationship between academia and government. Read and XR are a symptom, not a cause.

As the title suggests, greens *hate* liberty.

Environmentalism has always been about the strict regulation of lifestyle. It is not a coincidence that Read and many other XR's are drawn from the Quaker movement.

XR are a quasi-religious movement.

I don't mean to -- and I don't care to -- denigrate Quakers and Quakerism.

Your personal religious beliefs are yours.

But...

Something has happened to people of that persuasion, to make them feel it is their duty to impose themselves on others.

The Quaker and green movements have developed a sect that is analogous to the Talilban, which insists that *all* others must observe its strict codes.

They have absolutely no regard for the consequences of their actions or their demands. They will not debate.

This is a mirror of establishment environmentalism, which similarly eschews democracy and debate, and ultimately seeks to control lifestyles. The main difference being that establishment is still subject to nominally democratic processes (such as they are).

This is why the government and its agencies are incapable of dealing with XR. They are all but the same thing.

XR is the *fantasy* of establishment environmentalism: a cult of obedient zealots who demand state power to control every aspect of life.