Thread by @clim8resistance

James Murray wants to excuse himself from debate about the agenda he works so hard to sustain and profit from, by pitching it as project fear vs project fear.

Maybe so. But if there is an 'our' project fear, it is one which leaves democratic decision-making intact. @DavidRoseUK

https://twitter.com/James_BG/status/1454715128243531777

I -- and others -- have plenty more to argue besides 'there's no point acting if developing nations emissions are still rising'.

But it's a good point, all the same, and one of many that the #NetZero approach cannot answer, as even 'pro-climate' arguments point out.

Here, for e.g., is Prof. Dieter Helm arguing that the #NetZero deadline approach is flawed, and will drive policymakers into a collision with the public. His solution is a carbon tax, the merits of which can be debated, but which is much more realistic.

To the extent that the range of climate sceptics' arguments do produce a 'project fear', that is owed to tangible and measurable reality, not to a fantasy about society's harmonisation with an imagined natural 'balance' of nature.

Greens put ideology before debate, democracy & science.

Greens demand obedience, rather than free participation in political decision-making.

Greens put their design for the optimal organisation of society before the wants, needs & consent of ordinary people.

Greens want to build powerful political organisations above and beyond the control of democracy.

Greens are therefore dangerous ideologues, whether or not there is any science to support the claim that the climate is changing, because of human actions, and that it is a problem.