I'm going to propose a very provocative, but I believe true proposition. That is, we're all living in a cult, and have all been living in a cult for many generations. For so long, it has long been forgotten that things weren't always like that.
1/🧵
We're all familiar with the concept of a cult. A charismatic leader persuades their followers that they are their protector, that they know the right way, that they are the benefactor of their followers. When in reality, they are ruthlessly exploiting their followers.
2/
As I say, we're all familiar with the general model of a cult. We know examples of cults, and how these cults then exert extraordinary control over their followers. How outsiders can see this is self-evidently a cult, but those inside the cult cannot see this.
3/
We are in a climate and ecological crisis and in the words of the IPCC and the UN Secretary General @antonioguterres, we are facing an "unliveable future", unless there is radical action to address the climate and ecological emergency.
4/
Quite reasonably, @antonioguterres describes the pledges of our leadership to address the climate and ecological crisis, as a litany of broken promises. And also very reasonably implies they are liars.
5/
However, our leaders, and the clique of wealthy and powerful people who manipulatively control society for their own ends, are managing to convince most of the public, that activists and scientists demanding action, are radicals with a hidden agenda.
6/
Again, I point to what the UN Secretary General says to show it is not just what I say. I'm not suggesting we just slavishly follow what he says. However, he was summing up the best scientific evidence humankind has on the situation.
This behaviour of our leaders is very similar to cult leaders, who usually have a pejorative labels for members the cult who point out to others in the cult, how they are being used and manipulated.
8/
It really isn't in the interest of anyone that we fail to address the climate and ecological emergency, and create an unliveable future. However, it's in the interests of our leaders and the wealthiest and most powerful people, to put off taking action for as long as possible.
9/
This is because the top 1% in our societies, need to make a 30 fold reduction in their carbon emissions, for us to keep warming down to liveable levels. The richest need to make even bigger cuts and sacrifices, but the less well off don't.
10/
In other words, we have a society, where powerful and wealthy people controlling our societies, and exploiting everyone else for their own ends, are preventing necessary action, to protect their own interests.
11/
What is more, this ruling elite are also gaslighting the public that they are doing this for everyone else, even though in reality it is a suicidal route, putting us on a course for an unliveable future. How, can such a society, not be a cult?
12/
The trouble is we have lived in societies controlled and run by powerful and wealthy people, for their own ends, for so many generations, that everyone has forgotten that it was not always like this, and need not be like this.
13/
Let's get the facts clear. Homo sapiens, our species has been around for about 2-300,000 years and until 5000 years or so ago, everyone lived in egalitarian societies where resources were shared equally, and there were no high status individuals.
14/
Please note, this is no romantic vision, not the Noble Savage argument (which isn't what most people think it is), it is just a fact. There is no evidence for high status individuals much beyond 6000 years ago. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_sav…
15/
What is more, from what we can see, all these cultures revered the Earth and its natural systems, and understood the need to live within our ecological means.
16/
It's only in the last few thousands years, after powerful rulers took over our societies, that they succeeded in manipulating people into destroying the Earth's life support systems that sustain us, because it makes them very rich and powerful.
17/
Once again, I ask, how is such a system not a cult? Remembering again, that most people caught up in a cult, don't see it as a cult. That those who warn it is a cult are ostracized. That only outsiders generally see it as a cult.
18/
I do realize that often activists, climate scientists etc, get accused of being the ones in a cult. However, this is a classic case of projection, because warnings about the seriousness of the climate and ecological crisis, are based on massive scientific evidence.
19/
The problem is that this cult that has taken over all our societies, and demands people accept that economic growth is the whole purpose of life, and that therefore the over-exploitation destroying our life support systems is the only way. It is everywhere, all dominating.
20/
Cults often do not die with their leader. You could argue that organized religions are very long-lived cults. This is why full system change is necessary, because the current system basically is this cult. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1532765…
21/
Remember, cults are only really busted, when there is widespread understanding, especially from those within the cult, that this has been a malign cult. Yet there is no discussion at all about the cult like structure and thinking of our modern societies.
22/
Look out how climate activists, simply trying to bring attention to the latest @IPCC_CH report are being treated, and what the UN Secretary General said about this. If this is not cult like behaviour, then the term cult has no meaning.
I want to create a thread to highlight the rationale of the Conservative Party in wanting to get rid of England's statutory conservation body Natural England, and to absorb it into DEFRA. There is a long history to this, which must be understood. theguardian.com/environment/20…
1/🧵
To those unaware of the history, the UK used to have one single statutory conservation body, the NCC Nature Conservancy Council. The Chief Scientist of the NCC, was the late great Derek Ratcliffe, perhaps the greatest ecologist in over half a century. theguardian.com/news/2005/may/…
2/
"Such was the political unpopularity of his efforts that, just a few days after Derek's retirement in 1989, the Conservative environment secretary Nicholas Ridley announced the dismemberment of the NCC, leading to Britain's present-day nature conservation agencies."
3/
Going with my cult analogy, which I think is a reasonable description of the societies in which we now live, I think it is a good idea to look a bit deeper at how actual cults we actually recognise as cults, operate. This is in the context of the climate crisis.
1/🧵
Firstly, these cults develop a false identity, as though they are part of a deeper long-lived history. But usually this is cod history, pure fiction, created to engender a deep sense of identity for the cult leaders to manipulate people for their own ends.
2/
Actually, modern countries are like that. In the UK we have on the big island of Great Britain, England, Scotland and Wales. However, go back over 1000 years and ask the people about these countries, and they would have no idea what you were talking about.
3/
@marijebijl@threadreaderapp The one system that predominated did so because it has its roots in the violent gangsterism of warlords, running what were essentially protection rackets. It was parasitical.
1/🧵
@marijebijl@threadreaderapp Essentially, you had warlords who started claiming territories using force, conquest or threats of violence, in a continuous attempt to expand their territories. Once this pattern starts, it is like a cancer.
2/
@marijebijl@threadreaderapp Almost certainly there was never the concept of the ownership and land as we now know it. We can be fairly certain about this. When European colonists came into contact with Native American societies in N.America, it was noted they had no concept of ownership of land.
3/
@lifewithsommer I totally agree with you. Whilst those with climate and ecological anxiety need all the help and support possible, the anxiety itself is entirely rational and appropriate.
@lifewithsommer The primary reason I labelled this article as media gaslighting, is the headline, or standfirst as it is called in newspaper jargon - not the main body of text.
@lifewithsommer There are 2 pejorative terms i.e. negative value judgements in the standfirst "doom" and "worriers". Both terms are frequently used alongside "alarmist" to dismiss the concerns of activists.
3/
I think it fair to call all so called right wing populism, fascism, modern fascism. Firstly these liars, brand opponents, woke, communist and all the rest, without any regard for accuracy, or even if what they accuse their opponents of being is even real.
1/🧵
In other words, firstly the justification is that they deserve to be hoisted by their own petard. If they want to complain about being labelled fascists, they should put their own house in order and stop labelling their opponents with hateful, dishonest and inaccurate labels.
2/
Only if you use accurate terms to describe your opponents, have you the right to take issue with how your opponents label you. Fascist, new or modern fascist fits just fine, and is appropriate.
3/
I just made a point to another point about the public loving lying politicians. I have outlined what I think are the reasons for this, but I rarely see this mentioned in political analysis.
In the post WW2 period, we saw a decade upon decade general rise in living standards, and this set the template for politics in democracies. With politicians selling themselves as the flavour most likely to deliver this rise in living standards.
2/
It has been widely noted, how the public have long been losing faith in conventional politicians and parties, hence the rise in the populist right, and what are in reality a new type of fascist politician.
3/