Extinction Rebellion

Don't be ridiculous. We don't have an overpopulation problem in the UK. If anything, the opposite.

There's a very strong argument to say that there isn't an overpopulation problem anywhere in the world. Population levels are falling across the western world and in a lot of Asia. Populations are still increasing in much of Africa and Latin America, but it's largely due to poverty and lack of education and there are still very high rates of infant mortality.

Increasing population in itself is not a problem. What is a problem is the expansion of consumerism as political and economic philosophy into large parts of the world where it has been so far largely absent. The planet simply can't take that level of consumption and resource extraction and use. And that is what the XR movement is about. Trying to prod western governments into thinking about a more sustainable political economy and western populations into thinking about more sustainable lifestyles.

Those who bang on about overpopulation actually want the rest of the world to just stop, while they go on with enjoying their historically privileged lifestyles and without thinking, or actually dismissing, about the necessary changes we are all going to have to make.
Utter nonsense.
1 person requires 1 x resource and produces 1 x emissions.
1 billion?
7 billion?

The planet is a finite resource with a finite carbon sink and a finite atmospheric volume.
Of course the problem is population growth. Kull 90% of the population and the problem is solved overnight.
Greta's desire to go zero carbon in ten minutes will kill quite a few but it won't be enough.
 
Utter nonsense.
1 person requires 1 x resource and produces 1 x emissions.
1 billion?
7 billion?

The planet is a finite resource with a finite carbon sink and a finite atmospheric volume.
Of course the problem is population growth. Kull 90% of the population and the problem is solved overnight.
Greta's desire to go zero carbon in ten minutes will kill quite a few but it won't be enough.

Where is the population growing? I understand that the world population is projected to grow to 9 billion by the middle of the century, but where is that growth going to happen? It's important to know this, because your simplistic little formula above doesn't apply equally. 1 Malian's resource/emission ratio is a fraction of 1 Briton's, for example. So maybe your cull should be applied in Europe, N America and East Asia first?
 
I thought this was about climate change and not the whole socialist thing again?

Judging off the stake comment, it sounds to me more like you want stealth taxes to fund your socialist utopia rather than solve climate change?

I have always got the impression that this is the real aim for ER members and to them whilst the climate is important, establishing a socialist order is just as if not more important.

This is why they are totally devoid of reasoning behind the fact that for example it is the Tories and a Blair government that brought us from 3% renewables to 45% and a green tech boom. Those dirty capitalists....

You mentioned the M60 I was replying.

How you get stealth taxes from stake in society is some leap, world class leaping at that. ER are not Socialists, they are Liberals I would have thought.

And I have continually said, I support ERs right to protest, as I support the EDLs right to protest, I have not indicated I support there ideals, because if anything they are anti-working class. See KazzyDeyna's posts on the matter, they are excellent.
 
Utter nonsense.
1 person requires 1 x resource and produces 1 x emissions.
1 billion?
7 billion?

The planet is a finite resource with a finite carbon sink and a finite atmospheric volume.
Of course the problem is population growth. Kull 90% of the population and the problem is solved overnight.
Greta's desire to go zero carbon in ten minutes will kill quite a few but it won't be enough.


Climate change over the next 100 years will directly and indirectly lead to more deaths than any event in human history. It's absolute nonsense to say 'a desire to reduce our carbon emissions will kill people'.

People in western countries (such as me and presumably you) who have the financial means to change our lifestyle can do so at no cost to anyone else. This is a short read on veganism as an example:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/21/lifestyle-change-eat-less-meat-climate-change

I'm sure you and a lot of others who read that will say 'I'm not going vegan, I like to eat 13 steaks a week with a side of sausages and ribs'. But the reality is that the whole world couldn't consume the same levels of meat (especially red meat) as we do. We can ALL make lifestyle changes to reduce our individual impact on the environment. It boils down to people either being selfish (not caring about the damage their lifestyle has on future generations/poorer communities who'll bare the brunt of climate change) or being completely naïve about climate change and reluctant to consider it (which is also selfish).

Earth could provide for billions more humans if we lived a greener lifestyle.
 
Parallels can be drawn with WW2. An existential threat is there for all to see, but now as then there are plenty of appeasers as well as bury head in sand types.

All of us contribute in some way or other to the problem, but that doesn't mean we should heap scorn on those trying to do something about it.

Politicians around the world time and again have failed, time for another approach.
 
You need to back that up with clear scientific fact.

So far no one from ER has been able to other than to say "well people will die, we dont know how many but they will"

No shit.

As Neil pointed out in the last 100 years deaths from extreme weather incidents have dropped by 95%
 
Climate change over the next 100 years will directly and indirectly lead to more deaths than any event in human history. It's absolute nonsense to say 'a desire to reduce our carbon emissions will kill people'.

People in western countries (such as me and presumably you) who have the financial means to change our lifestyle can do so at no cost to anyone else. This is a short read on veganism as an example:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/21/lifestyle-change-eat-less-meat-climate-change

I'm sure you and a lot of others who read that will say 'I'm not going vegan, I like to eat 13 steaks a week with a side of sausages and ribs'. But the reality is that the whole world couldn't consume the same levels of meat (especially red meat) as we do. We can ALL make lifestyle changes to reduce our individual impact on the environment. It boils down to people either being selfish (not caring about the damage their lifestyle has on future generations/poorer communities who'll bare the brunt of climate change) or being completely naïve about climate change and reluctant to consider it (which is also selfish).

Earth could provide for billions more humans if we lived a greener lifestyle.
There are far fewer climate related deaths than ever before. Your assumptions are not backed by fact.
 
Don't be ridiculous. We don't have an overpopulation problem in the UK. If anything, the opposite.

There's a very strong argument to say that there isn't an overpopulation problem anywhere in the world. Population levels are falling across the western world and in a lot of Asia. Populations are still increasing in much of Africa and Latin America, but it's largely due to poverty and lack of education and there are still very high rates of infant mortality.

Increasing population in itself is not a problem. What is a problem is the expansion of consumerism as political and economic philosophy into large parts of the world where it has been so far largely absent. The planet simply can't take that level of consumption and resource extraction and use. And that is what the XR movement is about. Trying to prod western governments into thinking about a more sustainable political economy and western populations into thinking about more sustainable lifestyles.

Those who bang on about overpopulation actually want the rest of the world to just stop, while they go on with enjoying their historically privileged lifestyles and without thinking, or actually dismissing, about the necessary changes we are all going to have to make.
I have some sympathy for this viewpoint.

If XR campaigned for this, they might find they got more support than the utter, utter bullshit they spout about zero carbon by 2025, for example.
 
Parallels can be drawn with WW2. An existential threat is there for all to see, but now as then there are plenty of appeasers as well as bury head in sand types.

All of us contribute in some way or other to the problem, but that doesn't mean we should heap scorn on those trying to do something about it.

Politicians around the world time and again have failed, time for another approach.

If your last line was true, then perhaps. But it isn't.

Have you not heard of these things called wind turbines and electric cars? Have you not noticed the multiplying green/black/grey dustbins outside your house? Have you not see the changes to products like TV's, vacuum cleaners and what have you, to use less electricity? Or LED light bulbs replacing conventional ones?

You must lead a sheltered life to have missed all of this.
 
You need to back that up with clear scientific fact.

So far no one from ER has been able to other than to say "well people will die, we dont know how many but they will"

No shit.

As Neil pointed out in the last 100 years deaths from extreme weather incidents have dropped by 95%


You can't give exact facts, just projections. We know that a reduction in the supply of fresh water, agricultural land etc will lead to an increased possibility of premature deaths.

https://www.livescience.com/64535-climate-change-health-deaths.html

https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/...mperatures-suggests-more-deaths-unless-action

The 'conservative' figures presume approximately 250k deaths per year if climate change continues at it's current pace.
 
Authoritarian creep yet again.

The police now halting lawful protest.

Blocking roads is not lawful..

Go park your car across the M60 and when the police arrive tell them you are having a lawful protest and see how long you last.

Same for pitching a tent in the middle of a road in central London.

Peaceful protest could and should have been done via an organised march.
 
Blocking roads is not lawful..

Go park your car across the M60 and when the police arrive tell them you are having a lawful protest and see how long you last.

Same for pitching a tent in the middle of a road in central London.

Peaceful protest could and should have been done via an organised march.

A former Met Police commissioner disagrees. just said so on the radio, says it could have devastating consequences for any future protest. Police banned them from Trafalgar Square and are denying it was pre-planned.

When the planned pro-Brexit march is halted I am sure your opinion will differ.

Stopping any form of protest is anti-democratic and I am on record here saying I support the right of the halfwits from the EDL to protest.
 
Blocking roads is not lawful..

Go park your car across the M60 and when the police arrive tell them you are having a lawful protest and see how long you last.

Same for pitching a tent in the middle of a road in central London.

Peaceful protest could and should have been done via an organised march.

In any organised peaceful protest march or demonstration roads are invariably blocked.
 
Authoritarian creep yet again.

The police now halting lawful protest.

The Police supported their right to protest.

They created conditions to allow for it but XR broke the conditions which are there to minimize disruption and allow for them to protest safely and peacefully.

The Police have already spent enough time policing this instead of stopping murders of which there have been 5 in London since XR started last week.
 
The Police supported their right to protest.

They created conditions to allow for it but XR broke the conditions which are there to minimize disruption and allow for them to protest safely and peacefully.

The Police have already spent enough time policing this instead of stopping murders of which there have been 5 in London since XR started last week.

If the organisation that you are protesting against (the State) can give you conditions in which you can protest, then you don't actually have a protest and instead you're having a sanctioned party.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top