Comments on: What do we do when it fails?

By: Hannah Nicklin » Blog Archive » An Ethnographic Study of the Christmas Number One War of 2009

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:03:28 +0000

[...] bonuses, shamed politicians, a lazy, fact-less, right wing mainstream media and Cop15 having collapsed like a flan in a cupboard, might just be coming to a head just when we need [...]

By: Greenleftie

Greenleftie — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:41:25 +0000

I’m wondering if we should do anything at all? Species a sell out date, before they become extinct (it’s called specierial noonsphere)perhaps we just reached the end of ours. Life on earth will go on, it always does, even after mass extinctions.

Perhaps it would be better for life on earth if we just wipe ourselves out as the dominate species.

By: Hannah Nicklin

Hannah Nicklin — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:47:47 +0000

Hi Alisdair, thanks for commenting. I think my meaning has been confused a little here- I am not suggesting that there is such a thing as a ‘climate criminal’, nor that such people should be in any way abused – but rather that unsustainable standards of living have been mistaken for our ‘rights’ AND that these so-called rights are NOT so. When we assume them we impinge on the world, and in doing so, the rights of others. This is a difficult point, but one now wholly admitted by the bulk of developed nations. And surely as developed countries have admitted the bulk of the current damage from GHGs, and that the developing world is currently bearing the brunt of it, we as members of the societies which have prospered from that unsustainability have to admit that we have been complicit in that damage, and that we need to consider, in a very material way, how day-to-day decisions we make are highly damaging. Because this is a hard thing (to admit personal liability to the society you subscribe to) I then offered a whole list of actions, I’m not suggesting punishment, but positive and inclusive personal (and political – yes – but grassroots – forcing political change, rather than having it forced on us) action.

I understand that I have used both facts and personal-as-political assertions but not sure I ever say that grass roots is the ‘only’ way to fight CC. I state quite clearly that I believe we need top down change as well, but this post responds mainly to the question: ‘what do we do if we don’t get decisive and binding top down political action?’. In that scenario, we are all that we have left.

My love of hyperbole does tend towards rallying calls such as ‘smash the supermarkets’ and ‘break the bonds that capitalism has sold us’ — but I’m not sure what your argument is against the essence of those statements? Supermarkets have systematically destroyed our food system and play a very large part in encouraging waste, profligacy, driving prices down, causing deforestation, and making unsustainable farming practices necessary. We smash their stranglehold by changing our buying habits. Likewise it’s hard to deny that the moremoremore ethic sold to us – the product = prosperity model of modern marketing is highly damaging. Yes they do sound like political statements, but they are also a call to action, which needs to be bolstered by our understanding why from the facts of the matter. So 75% think that climate action is important – if government fails to take that action we need to enable individuals to do so.

Finally, I would never, ever suggest that anyone is stupid for doing or not doing something. It is a word I abhor and would never use, I don’t even believe in ‘stupidity’, only differing degrees of benign and malign ignorance. I do not suggest an ‘approved model’ or a ‘scheme’ of action here, but many, many individual choices which we need to consider if we are to make our lives more sustainable, driven from personal action, in lieu of the governmental. Things need to change, we can’t carry on as we are, we’re running out of time and the politicians refuse to take the bold action required, what are our alternatives?

By: Alasdair

Alasdair — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:56:54 +0000

For me where your post falls down is where you conflate facts with what mckay calls policy assertions – that the way to do this is to “reclaim grassroots politics” and “break the bonds that capitalism has sold us.” and allege that this is the “real” way to stop climate change – It may well be that to ration meat eating, have a one child policy, make flying so expensive that it is only available as a luxury for the wealthy and to “smash the supermarkets” would solve the problem of climate change – but that is a policy assertion and one which I doubt that would gain the same level of support as a generalised widespread desire to control climate change
now of course what you are proposing is only a voluntary scheme, that we as individuals should do this – which would be fine – but then you go from this to suggest that anyone who does not follow your approved model for reduction of greenhouse gases is “violating” your rights and is “stupid” this is rhetoric that has a very different and much more unpleasant tone. The idea that people who choose to take a ryanair flight are no longer citizens they are “climate criminals” and legitimate targets of abuse seems to me a deeply unhelpfull attitude.

Now that is not to say that we will not change our consumption habits or fly less by traditional airline in the future – but i doubt we are going to do it because we call anyone who chooses still to fly a “violator of our rights” or a “climate criminal”

By: Hannah Nicklin

Hannah Nicklin — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:48:38 +0000

Thanks for commenting, people. It’s not at all lame to comment in agreeance – it’s very welcome, otherwise you only engage with people who disagree ever, which is fine, but wearying

Claire, thanks very much for that link, not hijacking, very relevant.

Terence, brilliant changes, I guess the next step is community change after that? I also think it’s really important not to forget people on low incomes and who aren’t in a position to own their houses/furnishings. There’s definitely room for green lets (the house I rent gets its hot water from solar panels, and is v well insulated/lit with LEDs etc), and also in raising awareness for what you can do, if you can’t make headway on certain areas. Positive, positive, positive.

By: Terence Eden

Terence Eden — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:19:38 +0000

Chalk me up for another “I agree”.

Around 3 years ago, I gave up my car. I moved to an area well served by public transport. I either carry my food home from my local market or have the (evil) supermarket deliver it via one of their energy efficient vehicles.

I gave up eating meat and fish years ago – for health as much as the environment and as a consequence, my food bills are lower.

Energy efficient light bulbs? Electricity monitor? Turning things off at the switch? A* rated appliances? All a significant investment but all paying dividends now.

What I think really needs to be hammered home is just how much you can save as an individual. Talking about flooding in foreign lands, or deforestation of forest most people will never see just doesn’t get through. Make it personal. Make it appeal to their selfishness. Switching to paperless billing saves money and trees – the perfect combination.

By: Claire Spencer

Claire Spencer — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:30:45 +0000

It’s lame to comment just to agree, but I really, really do. All I would add is that making those distinctions between ‘rights’ and ‘things we quite like’, and changing behaviour accordingly, doesn’t have to reduce quality of life. I would go so far to say that it won’t – but there is a huge perception that it will. That is a really big problem, and it is there that we have a duty to influence our friends, colleagues and communities – people are influenced by one another. They want to see that people like them are doing it, and that’s where it won’t help for politicians or protestors to yell at people from a pedestal, that’s where community action is important.

I would add re: supermarkets, we as consumers can start here (http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ukfoodwaste/) by demanding oversight of how they push food waste up and down the food chain. They can’t go anywhere, they have to be where we are. So let’s make sure that they’re not committing our carbon emissions to food that is destined for the dustbins. And apologies for hijacking your comment box, but it seemed fitting! x

By: Chris Coltrane

Chris Coltrane — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:29:44 +0000

“You do not have a right to cheap flights, to travel, to meat in every meal, to fizzy drinks, or to change your wardrobe every season. These are luxuries. Unsustainable ones. We need to break the bonds that capitalism has sold us. Your rights are to equality, to lack of persecution, to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being, to life and liberty.”

YES. I agree completely.