1. 1.5C is not a point of data but a religious artifact. It is imbued with the sacred taboo of the global liberal class: the all pervasive dogma of progress, the unspeakable terror of regression and fall (a proxy for death). It can never be allowed to be passed.
2. But it will. And when it does a whole world of meaning will collapse and the psychological and spiritual suffering of this class will become unbearable for them. History will have returned.
1. 🧵 I'm in court today.
Why?
Because I'm not pretending anymore.
And if you stop pretending that's what happens to you.
2. “On our current path, civilisation as we know it will disappear. If we meet current commitments only – net zero by 2050 – perhaps some form of humanity will survive, managing the challenges of continued extreme weather events, ice loss, and sea-level and temperature rises.” @Sir_David_King theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
3. “The economic damage wrought by climate change is six times worse than previously thought, with global heating set to shrink wealth at a rate consistent with the level of financial losses of a continuing permanent war.” theguardian.com/environment/ar…
🎙️The British Establishment is A Cult: My BBC Interview
"If warming reaches or exceeds 2 degrees Centigrade (Celsius), mainly richer humans will be responsible for killing roughly 1 billion mainly poorer humans.”
1/9 🧵
2. Like other interviews I’ve done with members of the political class, this one again shows their psychotic inability to see that the real world trumps the political world.
The contemporary British Establishment is a cult that believes in two extreme worldviews:
3. Vulgar Utilitarianism:
The complete inability to see the value in doing anything because it is good in itself. Everything is a function of the question “does it work?” – which practically results in a chronic short- termism, and the notion that ends always justify the means
1. 🧵It is important that Hansen's paper "one of the most important published on the state of the #ClimateCrisis in years" is seen as combining two modes of analysis: ... @Sir_David_King @DrJamesEHansen : ..2/.📢➡️
2. ... the naturalistic objectivist analysis of the physical and biological environment and a normative subjectivist analysis of the process of social change.
3. Often the latter gets hidden in the former so that embedded in "the science", consciously or unconsciously, are high disputable statements about "how to make social and political change happen."
1/10 🧵"By [2100], an estimated 3 to 6 billion individuals—approximately 1/3 to 1/2 of the global population—might find themselves confined beyond the liveable region, encountering severe heat, limited food availability, & elevated mortality rates because of...climate change"
3/10 Read this carefully to see how scientists use euphemisms: "confined beyond the liveable region" - why not just say "will be confined to an unliveable region".
1. "We environment reporters are urged not to say this because it may sap the will of the public to take action on #climate if they believe it’s too late"
Planning to have people die is one thing - knowing this truth and lying about it is something else. edition.independent.co.uk/edition/uk.co.…
2. There is a special place in hell being prepared for liberal journalists.
3. Over the past 5 years, every time I have the misfortune to meet privately with journalists, scientists and politicians, I feel physically sick. They always talk about how fucked things are but how "we can''t tell people the real situation because... ".
1/10 🧵How British progressive neoliberals facilitated fascism last week.
Last week the left progressive establishment again made the fatal error of lying to the British people about the alternative to the Sunak policy shift to national suicide. It pretended that maintaining ...
2/10 ... the move to “net zero” would create green growth and related delusional abstractions. This decision to lie is rationalized by an embedded pathology of the neoliberal left: that is better to lie to make short term gain (win the election), than to tell the truth, ...
3/10 ... that is to lose in the short term and gain in the longer term.
Fascism has its own lie: that it can ignore net zero & everything will be fine. True in the short term but suicidal (like all fascisms) in the long term. A final suicide in this case.