Clash at Copenhagen
"I regret to report we have been unable to reach agreement," said John Ashe of Antigua to the full 193-nation conference in Copenhagen Wednesday morning. The Global Climate Meeting, which concludes Friday, has been called a failure by one of the organizers Anne Petermann, saying there are “thousands of other solutions to climate change that aren’t being considered.” Meanwhile, outside the Bella Luna Center is another story. Riot police have arrested 250 demonstrators, as water cannons, pepper spray, and batons have been used against the crowd. “Danish police have been violating human rights all week,” says Richard Bernard, a member of one of the protest groups. A group of delegates attending the conference attempted to meet with the protesters, but were driven back by the police as skirmishes broke out between the police and protesters.
The goal for this year’s meeting was to set new goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and for finding ways to finance poorer countries’ efforts to cope with climate change; all of which, as reported The Associated Press, has not been accomplished. Connie Hedegaard, the Danish chairwoman of the conference who stepped down from her position last night told the delegates, “In these very hours, we are balancing between success and failure. Success is still within reach. But I must also warn you: we can fail.”
Images: by Greenpeace Finland on Flickr courtesy of Creative Commons Licensing.
Tweet- 12-16-09
- Kyle Davis's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Comments
Humanity-1 Carbon-Nazis-0
I am delighted to see that the Carbon-Nazis are not getting their way. Hopefully it will give Humanity time to wake up from the media trance and realise that they are beeing conned.
An audit of that 'Sacred Cow' Greenpeace might also be helpful to see who is paying the tuneless piper.
Namaste.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TqqWJugXzs
http://www.redicecreations.com/
indeed the green fascists have been exposed
Interesting
(No subject)
So tiring...
I haven't done much reading on the whole AGW debate, either way... the whole thing just seems so tiring to me. If there's accurate scientific evidence that gives credence to both sides of the argument, what's a layman supposed to believe?
When I look around at the world and notice things like dead oceans, topsoil depletion, deforestation, species extinction, etc... And when I think about this unprecedented pocket of history in which we're currently living, having unleashed the power of millions and millions of years of concentrated, stored sunlight in the form of fossil fuels over the course of barely 200 years, when during most of that time people scarcely considered the potential consequences, my heart and intuition leads my thinking towards "Yes, chances are we are affecting the global biosphere in ways we can't even imagine."
But, I also recognize that most of the solutions proposed by the mainstream so-called think-tanks will only lead us towards a kind of green-fascism, methods that seem to resemble a kind of green shock doctrine, and that's not going to be good for anyone, because proposals like cap-and-trade seem pretty bogus to me. It only ostensibly addresses the problem, when in reality, it will likely do more harm than good.
makes me sleepy too
So much of our potential human energy is spent bickering over the surface level arguments for and against global warming. As wakingsleep points out, its really as simple as looking around us and seeing human influence on the enironment: our oceans with plastic in practically every drop, poisoned groundwater everywhere, toxic air in cities, etc. These are facts, and these are problems to be overcome. I would think we can agree on this simple point.
Who honestly has any interest in reading the same old attacks and slander each side hurls towards the other? As one can observe, the Reality Sandwich crowd in general is beyond such base competitive tactics.
Moving on, there are problems observable in the environment. Many are a direct result of human activity. At the core, plastic particles in our water cannot be attributed to anything other than the current state of the petroleum industry and, in turn, the modern global economy. The global warming debate is over-generalized and unfortunately distracts us from such real issues of pollution.
An important step in approaching any issue in which consumption, industry and the environnment come into play is to realize that there are enough resources on this planet for everyone to live a life of abundance while keeping the earth in great shape. Working to end the hoarding of resources by corporations and governments would be an appropriate strategy to consider in light of this fact. Abundance is everywhere, but the distribution is restricted by outmoded economic inventions that, at one time in history, had their rightful place. With this realization, we can focus on approaching manufacturing, technology, transportation, agriculture, etc. with the primary goal of maximum efficiency and sustainability instead of the current goal of profit and the ill-effects that generates: multiplicity, planned obsolesence, quality stratification along lines of purchasing power, etc. With access to the real abundance of resources on this planet, we can effectively pursue durable, efficient clean energy on a massive scale. The only thing preventing such a move is a sluggish dinosaur called economics, backed by the naturally self-preserving establishment.
Probability would have Copenhagen fail because the conference tries to affect change through the the actions of world leaders. To get to the position they are in required some level of corruption no matter how you measure it. The system they lead must, by neccessity, work towards preventing change, or controlling the rate of change, in order to maintain the establishment. It's time to ignore the conference. Let it go. Real change will likely happen from us creating it ourselves, step by step, beginning with a mass awakening of the public to two facts:
1) There are enough resources available on earth for everyone to live a comfortable life.
2) Attempting to affect change through the political system is inefficient, and typically leads to solutions that constitute patchwork upon more patchwork, perpetuating the underlying flawed system.
What does everyone else think? I'd like to hear.
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground
Thanks, Zuke!
I agree, the COP15 conference is destined to fail (or succeed, depending on your perspective... from the coal and oil industries, it's probably seen as a sweeping success!) because it's only ostensibly meant to address environmental issues. As with every other piece of legislation that comes out of the governments of the industrialized first world, any legislation passed must first and foremost serve as an economic benefit to the global corporations. This is the fundamental issue.
Governments serve the needs of corporations and the citizens of industrialized first world nations (long ago relegated to the status of "consumers") have come to identify with the needs of the corporations at the detriment of real human needs. This in and of itself was a shift in consciousness, but it was a relegation of consciousness; "Welcome my son, to The Machine."
You are right, as the line in the Tool song, Right In Two goes: "Don't these talking monkeys know that Eden has enough to go around?" Corporatism thrives on artificial scarcity, and our economic system is based on the illusion of the artificial scarcity of wealth, which permeates into all aspects of life since so many aspects of life have been commodified. Charles Eisenstein illustrates this beautifully in his series of essays on new money systems that were published here a while back, and in his book "The Ascent Of Humanity" (probably one of the most important books to be written in our time).
I also agree with you that trying to evoke change through the political system is futile, because the political system is far too entwined in the corportocracy. It's a lost cause. Many people call me cynical for thinking this, but looking back on recent history, it seems clear. For every step taken forward, there's three or four steps taken backward.
Nothing short of a shift in consciousness will pull us through this.... and of course, that is pretty much the cornerstone of this website, isn't it?
(No subject)
(No subject)
Clash at Copenhagen
Where in Kansas you from
gotta watch out
**&^%$%$
As an old friend once proposed, we need a bumper sticker that says, "Fuck Tibet, free your mid." Apperenlty a bunch of Tibetan monks really liked the idea.
* * *
Be sure to check out my book, Mediacology (http://mediacology.com/the-book/)
Wichita
GLOBAL WARMING
Global Clashing To Divert Attention
Goberments can't achieve so much going it the old way. Rugged and relaxed individuals have to show the ways through living lives. Styles devoted to the cause of harmony. Show it, prove it, walk it, lock and load it on heavy and with grace. Say no more!