Thread by @SteB777

1) I want to start this thread to prove why @GretaThunberg is correct and why people in power know exactly what they are doing. That they are not trying to address the climate and ecological crisis, but they are blocking action to address it, to maintain business as usual.

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1456731487928205321

2) As I explained in this recent thread maintaining business as usual is mutually incompatible with addressing the climate and ecological, which requires whole system change. Business as usual is what is driving the crisis.

https://twitter.com/SteB777/status/1455262511868129287

3) It's now more or less 50 years since world leaders first promised to address the ecological and sustainability crisis at the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm. Read the report linked to in the page linked to below.
un.org/en/conferences…

4) It is crystal clear from the report of the 1972 UN Environment Conference, that it was fully understood that we needed to radically change direction to prevent a future global catastrophe.
undocs.org/en/A/CONF.48/1…

5) 10 years after the 1972 Conference, the UN was so alarmed by the failure of governments to address the challenges outline in the report, that they set up the Brundtland Commission in 1983, whose 1987 report was Our Common Future.
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/docume…

6) Our Common Future (1987) even deals with "global climatic change", even though it was published a year before the @IPCC_CH was founded. This report formed the basis of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Please read Our Common Future to see what was known and when.

7) At the 1992 Rio Earth Summit the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was signed, which formed the basis for the future COP talks. Most importantly though, world leaders pledged to address the climate and ecological crisis.
un.org/en/conferences…

8) We now have more or less 30 years of empirical evidence to prove what happened after all these pledges to address this known crisis. Greenhouse gas emissions doubled over this in the previous 250 years.
ieep.eu/news/more-than…

9) Biodiversity continued to collapse, plastic pollution exploded and so much other environmental destruction trends continued accelerating that I can't even list it here.
theguardian.com/environment/20…

10) However, what is of must importance in the way our so called leadership, both government and business promised to address this crisis. They said we will take action, but not just yet. Nevertheless we will have taken action in the next 20-30 years.

11) Well here we are 30 years later and where is this promised action? Emissions rapidly increased and are still increasing. Biodiversity collapse continues unabated (there are no realistic proposals at all to halt this).

12) Quite incredibly, instead of saying this is terrible, we promised action, and it has all got much worse, we must act immediately, what do they do. They give another rain cheque/check of Net Zero by 2050, kicking the can down the road again.

13) There is no promise of immediate action FOR ONE SIMPLE REASON. If the powerful pledged immediate action, it would be clear in only a few years that they were not taking this action.

14) However, by promising Net Zero by 2050, 2060 or 2070, depending on the government, we are forced to wait 30, 40 or 50 years, to see if these pledges are genuine. We know 30-50 years ago, that these pledges weren't genuine. They were false.

15) It is only quite recently, that we've been able to tell that the pledges to address the crisis 30 years ago at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit weren't genuine, because for the last 30 years governments have been talking up their plans.

16) Governments have had departments for the last 30 years supposedly planning for this. Politicians gave repeated speeches promising action. For all we knew, they did have big plans to address the crisis.

17) Yet now we know for a fact that the powerful have no plans to address this crisis, and all they have done are to make vague promises that they will reach Net Zero in the next 30-50 years. However, this report casts doubt on this.
theguardian.com/environment/20…

18) Most importantly, even if the Net Zero by 2050 plans were realistic, they will do absolutely nothing to address the biodiversity crisis, plastic pollution and the rest of the ecological crisis. Yet these must all be addressed together.
un.org/sustainabledev…

19) However, my overall point is this. If the powerful controlling our societies actually meant what they said about addressing this crisis, not just now, but 30 or 50 years ago, they would say, we messed up, we must take immediate action.

20) Instead, all they do is offer us vague promises about doing something that might partially address just one part of the problem, but we will have to wait 30-50 years to find out if they were telling the truth.

21) This whole pattern of behaviour by the powerful over the last 50 years is consistent with one thing, and that is maintaining business as usual. Business as usual gives the richest in society, luxurious lifestyles, power, status and wealth.

22) In other words, the wealthiest 1% who control everything in our societies, have simply put off taking action to maintain their high consumption, high emitting lifestyles. It is corruption plain and simple. Here's the evidence.
theguardian.com/environment/20…

23) Here is @jrockstrom at COP26 explaining how the richest 1% must reduce their emissions by 30 times to meet the Paris 1.5C target, but the poorest can increase their emissions. It's crystal clear who has got the most motivation to obstruct action.

24) The implications from @jrockstrom's presentation, are crystal clear. There must be radical change to our system, to avert the worst impacts of the climate crisis. However, this change would most effect the most powerful in our society.

25) The most powerful would have to radically reduce their consumption and emissions, to simply avert the climate component of the crisis, let alone the rest. Making it quite clear why they're so focused on maintaining business as usual.

26) It is my contention that out of self-interest, abusing their power in our societies, the powerful are simply interested in maintaining their lifestyles, their power, status and wealth, which they know would be impacted by the necessary system change to address the crisis.

27) They are as @GretaThunberg implies, very awake to what they are doing. They are doing all they can to maintain business as usual, out of self-interest. They are also well aware that is not in the interest of the rest of humanity.

28) The powerful and wealthy, our so called leaders are well aware that the public actually want effective action to address the climate and ecological crisis, so to maintain their positions of power in our societies, they have to make these promises.

https://twitter.com/UniofOxford/status/1452623544194682888

29) However, the promises they make to the public are just hollow and meaningless. They have no intention of really acting on the flowery pledges they make, they are simply a tool to allow them to stay in power, and to maintain their lifestyles, power, status, wealth & privilege.

30) As I say, we now have 50 years of empirical evidence of how meaningless their pledges to address this crisis are and how in fact, they are only focused on one thing, and that is maintaining business as usual.

31) The only thing I would act, is that whilst the powerful are wide awake to what they are doing, they don't really understand the implications of what this means, because they falsely believe their wealth will protect them from the worst impacts (it won't).

32) Their plans are not well thought out, this is just crudely about maintaining their self-interests, their lifestyles, privilege, wealth, power and status. But most of all, maintaining their grip on the levers of power in our societies.

@GretaThunberg @GeorgeMonbiot @ClimateHuman @JKSteinberger @KevinClimate

@threadreaderapp Please unroll?

Should be "the only thing I would add".