"The only way the defenders of business as usual can be in a position of protecting BAU from reform, is to pretend be trying to address the climate and ecological emergency, and therefore put themselves in a position of control over what measures are considered and implemented."
It's in quotes, because I just wrote it in an email to someone.
This is what triggered me writing this, and it pretty much encapsulates what I've been trying to get across in my threads on Twitter i.e. the narrative.
nature.com/articles/d4158…
The primary difference with myself, is that I had decided a long time ago, that as far as the powers that be are concerned, these conferences are not there to address the crisis, but to ensure that no action disrupts or changes business as usual, or alters the status quo.
Once, again The only way the defenders of business as usual, and the status quo, can ever be in a position to control the agenda is by putting themselves in the position of being those who are supposedly trying to address the climate and ecological crisis.
How, does this work, I'm not really sure? I'm not a mind reader, I cannot see into the minds of those doing this and know how exactly they see things.
However, I am absolutely certain as @GretaThunberg has said, that our leaders are wide awake to the fact that they are actively obstructing any action to address the climate and ecological emergency, which threatens the continuance of business as usual.
What I am not sure about, is how much insight those obstructing effective action to address the climate and ecological emergency are aware of, is what the actual consequences of their actions will be. I'm pretty certain they don't fully understand it.
The bit I am not sure about, is how aware they are about consigning a large proportion of humanity in the future to mass starvation. Do they delusionally believe that somehow the rich can ride this out. I have no idea, as I say, I'm not a mind reader.
However, their culpability is massive, and they are to some extent knowingly committing ecocide, and have some insight into the mass deaths they will cause.

These people are not our real leaders, they are the enemies of humanity. They are imposters, displaying fake sentiment.
Given everything, these pseudo-leaders, cannot but be aware of the massive gravity of what they are doing.
@threadreaderapp Please unroll?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephen Barlow

Stephen Barlow Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SteB777

12 Nov
The only good thing to come out of COP26 is that at least we now know with absolute certainty that our current leadership/system is utterly incapable of meaningfully addressing the climate and ecological emergency.
What inspired me to write this scathing response is good people, experts, have wasted the best part of 30 years engaging with politicians who quite clearly don't want to do anything meaningful, and who are actually far more concerned about protecting the fossil fuel industry.
The fact that governments still provide this obscene level of subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, 30 years after they were supposed to be reducing emissions, and by implication fossil fuel burning, says they're utterly disingenuous in their sentiment.
theguardian.com/environment/20…
Read 8 tweets
11 Nov
1) What this is illustrates is how accurate my previous thread was about the primary obstacle to a realistic agreement to address the climate crisis is. It's just crude self-interest. Countries which can profit from fossil fuels don't want to give them up.
independent.co.uk/climate-change…
2) Here's my other thread. Whilst it was focused on personal wealth and privilege, the ability to profit from fossil fuel extraction, ultimately comes down to the same thing. Individuals personally benefiting from what is driving the crisis.
3) Just think about the countries constantly obstructing progress. The most notorious is oil rich Saudi Arabia, then we have Australia with it's massive coal resources, Russia with it's oil and gas reserves, and the list goes on.
Read 19 tweets
10 Nov
1) I want to try and help to define the obstacle that is effectively stopping us successfully addressing the climate and ecological crisis and avoiding unnecessary catastrophe.

I'm not trying to dictate my ideas, but to start constructive dialogue.
2) I've been observing supposed attempts to address the ecological/sustainability crisis for the last 50 years. I have seen our leaders promise action to address this crisis, and then fail to deliver the necessary action to turn things around.
3) As we now have 50 years empirical evidence, we can now be absolutely certain what the actual obstacle to progress is.

This obstacle is to actually address this crisis, we have to fundamentally change the current system. Yet our leaders don't want to change this system.
Read 37 tweets
8 Nov
1) This is the fault of politicians and the media who for nearly 25 years have peddled the lie that it is possible to address the climate and ecological emergency, the sustainability crisis with business as usual.
theguardian.com/environment/20…
2) In the early to mid-1990s, and prior to this, there was much acknowledgement, and open discussion that shifting to a sustainable society/economy, meant a transformation of our societies/economies. A no growth economy, a shift away from private cars, lower consumption etc.
3) I can't say exactly when the shift away from this narrative/dialogue occurred everywhere, but in the UK I remember it started when New Labour got into power and then UK Chancellor Gordon Brown, started to talk about sustainability being slow and steady economic growth.
Read 41 tweets
7 Nov
Again @GretaThunberg has got the core essence of the problem right.

The need for drastic cuts to emissions immediately, are because of the failure of our governments to make incremental cuts, when there was time available and they knew they had do this.
There are lots of people stupidly attacking Greta (although she is only the messenger) or demanding how can we manage with less energy. It's as if these problems are caused by environmentalists, or those pointing to the science.
The only people to blame for the need for drastic and immediate cuts in emissions now are our governments, vested interests that blocked past emissions cuts. They could have made slow and incremental cuts, if they had started over 25 years ago.
Read 11 tweets
6 Nov
This is Orwellian, corrupt and fascistic. Nadhim Zahawi the Education Secretary is trying to stop young climate strikers with threats against their parents.

The same Nadhim Zahawi who has received over £1 million from the fossil fuel industry.
theguardian.com/education/2021…
See more about Nadhim Zahawi's fossi fuel funding and background in the fossil fuel industry here and the huge direct personal payments to him. The motivation for Zahawi's attempt to clamp down on young climate strikers is crystal clear, corruption.
theguardian.com/environment/20…
At one point Nadhim Zahawi was receiving a personal salary of £30,000 a month from an oil company, whilst he was an MP.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(