Naturalist, Conservationist, Environmentalist and Nature Photographer (especially macro). Born at 314ppm. Woke (awake).
https://t.co/B7XkkKho07
32 subscribers
Jul 22 • 23 tweets • 6 min read
I want to expand this, as it seems a lot are not getting what I'm saying and why.
The vast majority of the public, have no idea what neoliberalism is, or that the mainstream parties they vote for, all adhere to neoliberal ideology, as they don't declare it, and deny it.
1/🧵
The main problem with neoliberal ideology, is its invisibility, hence the title of George Monbiot and Peter Hutchinson's book and film about it, being called the Invisible Doctrine. George sums it up in the short trailer.
2/
Jul 22 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
I have just come up with an idea for how to unify a progressive alliance.
It could be called something like "Oppose Neoliberalism", and be a declaration of common cause, in opposing neoliberalism.
1/🧵
The idea would be to put the focus on the political parties (or their leadership), that secretly adhere to the tenets of neoliberalism, and to put clear water, between parties and leaders who support, neoliberalism, and those who oppose it.
2/
Jul 21 • 19 tweets • 5 min read
I think I need to reiterate this point, because we are being buried under a mass of disinformation and false argument.
I fully supported this statement in this thread, and I know of no credible supported evidence, that contradicts this point.
1/🧵
Any claim that business as usual BaU can continue for much longer, is not credible. It is an article of faith, by those who believe in our system now, as some sort of quasi religious tenet.
"Climate change-induced food price shocks are on the rise and could lead to more malnutrition, political upheaval and social unrest as the world’s poorest are hit by shortages of food staples."
I have been warning about this for decades.
1/🧵theguardian.com/business/2025/…
However, there is a fundamental flaw in the thinking of this research, which grossly under-estimates the threat from this danger, which I will outline here.
Most of these assumptions, mistakenly see a steadily increasing problem.
2/
Jul 17 • 13 tweets • 3 min read
This is part 3 of my thread, in which I want to return to my original theme of taxing rich, the very rich, not slightly better off. This both illustrates the obstacle, and the solution.
1/🧵
As I initially explained, despite over 75% of the UK public, wanting a wealth tax, this Labour government and all previous governments, will refuse to agree to it, because of neoliberal doctrine, which is essentially the credo of oligarchs.
2/
Jul 17 • 22 tweets • 5 min read
This is part 2 of the thread I just posted, as for some reason, Twitter is not allowing me to continue it in threaded style.
I was discussing how our system is rigged, and how our sense of freedom and democracy, is essentially illusory, as it's a rigged system.
1/🧵
When powerful individuals started taking over our societies 5-6,000 years (it wasn't like this for >95% of the existence Homo sapiens), they have learned how to perpetuate their control of our societies, in an evolutionary way.
2/
Jul 17 • 21 tweets • 4 min read
I cannot state how important it is to understand this, and not just as regards neoliberalism.
Most activists make the mistake of thinking, if they campaign, that they can change something in the system. Not realizing that the system it rigged.
1/🧵
In other words, people can have anything they like, but only if it is within what the powerful few who control our society will allow. If it isn't, the controlling clique will block it, regardless of public opinion, and election results.
2/
Jul 16 • 16 tweets • 4 min read
I am very supportive of @garyseconomics call for a wealth tax.
However, I am also very puzzled about how he shows no understanding of why the UK government will not implement a wealth tax, and that is neoliberal doctrine.
I left a comment explaining this on his YouTube video, and it seems to have been hidden, as there's not been a single interaction with it.
So I did various Google searches, to find out Gary's position on neoliberalism, and was surprised to find he has never mentioned it.
2/
Jul 15 • 10 tweets • 3 min read
There is no point to Keir Starmer. People didn't so much vote for his Labour as no one could work out what he stood for. They were voting against the Conservatives, but they ended up with the Tories 2.0
1/🧵
Most of the public feel this way, because Keir Starmer's approval ratings are at an all time low, and so is support for the Labour Party. They are so dreadful, they have pushed the even more dreadful Reform Party into the lead.
"Risotto rice under threat from flamingoes in north-eastern Italy"
I have a very simple solution to this problem. It already happens in paddy fields in Asia, and just requires a bit of ecological knowledge.
1/theguardian.com/environment/20…
Flamingoes are filter feeders, which feed on aquatic invertebrates. Self-evidently, there are plenty of aquatic inverts in the newly flooded paddy fields, or the Flamingoes wouldn't be there.
2/
Jul 11 • 17 tweets • 4 min read
"Why is Labour so afraid to admit that we must tax the rich to help the poor?"
It's an excellent question, and one I'll answer here. In essence, senior politicians are the poodles of the very rich. Especially Keir Starmer and co.
1/🧵theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
If anyone has any doubts about this, look at the extraordinary attacks on the sick and disabled, by not only Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves etc, but the leaders of the Conservative and Reform Parties, and especially, the Tory Press. They are literally frothing at the mouth.
2/
Jul 9 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
Does anyone know what the name is, for the logical fallacy, which I call the walk around problem?
What I mean by this, is when you make a well-supported factual assertion, and an opponent, will blatantly just walk around it, refusing to acknowledge the point.
1/🧵
Often this point, is a fundamental premise and assumption of many arguments. You can completely undo these arguments, by totally undermining the fundamental premises of these arguments. But it is totally useless, if the opponent just refuses to acknowledge the point.
2/
Jul 9 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
I have repeatedly seen people, including some climate scientists, falsely claim that okay, climate warming might get pretty bad, but it won't be the end of the world.
I'm baffled by such claims.
1/🧵
It's a straw many logical fallacy argument, as no informed person, is claiming that climate change will cause the world i.e. the planet, to cease to exist.
Rather, the claim has always been it could lead to a wide scale loss of life, and the collapse of our civilization.
2/
Jul 9 • 20 tweets • 4 min read
The most important thing to understand about the climate and ecological emergency, is that profound and radical change, is coming whether you like it or not. That change might come far sooner, than most people, almost everyone, envisages.
1/🧵
"There are now no non-radical futures. The choice is between immediate and profound social change or waiting a little longer for chaotic and violent social change. In 2023 the window for this choice is rapidly closing." @KevinClimate
The climate crisis situation, has changed dramatically in the last few years. It is now very clear, that all major governments, will seriously resist the climate action necessary, to prevent climate catastrophe, and up to 3-4C of warming.
1/🧵
Up until just a few years ago, it seemed possible/plausible, although unlikely, that major governments may have eventually agreed, to the sort of action necessary to avert climate catastrophe, such as the phasing out of fossil fuels. This hope is now completely gone/dead.
2/
Jul 5 • 21 tweets • 5 min read
There seems to be some sort of censorship going on, because this very important thread I wrote, does not appear on my X profile timeline, despite the very clear evidence that I wrote and posted it.
1/🧵threadreaderapp.com/thread/1941216…
Here's a direct link to my first post from @threadreaderapp, yet these posts do not appear on my profile timeline
What is going on here? The evidence I raise here, says government level climate action, has always been fake. That we're being gaslighted.
I say the reason that governments/politicians/the media don't want to communicate climate change dangers with the fear tactics, they use to change public attitudes and opinion, with every other issue, is because they don't want the public to demand climate action
2/
Jul 3 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
To clarify something. I'm briefly focused on questioning the moral and ethical fitness of the current Keir Starmer Labour regime, over the planned sickness benefit cuts and the justification of the horrific genocide in Gaza. This is not because I've forgotten the climate.
1/🧵
My biggest criticism of Keir Starmer's regime, is his failure to produce any realistic climate policy, his scrapping of nature and environment protection and his focus on economic growth, to the exclusion of all else (it is what is driving the climate and ecological crisis)
2/
Jul 1 • 44 tweets • 7 min read
To add to this, I think it is necessary to go back to the drawing board, with the whole messaging as regards the climate, ecological and social justice crisis.
Communication over these matters, evolved out of a situation, which has either ceased to exist, or never existed.
1/🧵
The strategy all along, was to convince politicians to take the necessary action. Indeed, governments have supposedly been committed for 53 years to take action on this polycrisis.
However, they've never even attempted to take the pledged action.
'One senior NHS figure said they were seeing “medieval” levels of untreated illness in some of Britain’s poorest communities'
Could this be why there's been a big increase in those claiming sickness and disability benefits?
1/🧵theguardian.com/society/2025/j…
We were told by members of Rishi Sunak's cabinet, and now Keir Starmer's cabinet, that there was no reason why the numbers of those claiming sickness and disability benefits were increasing.
Whilst, actually, there is a crisis of poor health in the UK's poorest communities.
2/
Jun 29 • 43 tweets • 8 min read
I admit to having made a huge error. In my time commenting on the Guardian, I thought I had explained enough about the climate and ecological crisis, to straighten out many of the misconceptions about it. But obviously I hadn't.
1/🧵
I know much of my commenting was well read and influential. It was not a guess. Just before the pandemic, the former editor of the Guardian Environment section, the late John Vidal, invited me to his Nature Festival in Oswestry, because he told me he wanted to meet me.
2/
