Climate Change Is Violent, That’s Why We Need Sabotage | Downstream

[@oldstatueface6317]

Going from the evening news to this is like stepping into a puddle with one foot and down the Mariana Trench with the next.

[@lsobrien]

@P JL Let it never be said that P JL can't talk shit.

[@Neuroticmancer]

@P JL lmao write another essay

[@lsobrien]

@P JL I didn't ask you to tell me you have a scat fetish in 10,000 words.

[@andygardner5810]

@@lsobrien Bit of a febreeze sniffer as well.

[@WhoOneIs]

The idea that a major fossil fuel corporation will stop drilling if enough people lay down on the ground in protest is ridiculous. Turning the other cheek is only recommended to those on the receiving end of a slap, never to those doing the slapping.

[@Baffon100]

To paraphrase the title of a book: "The Nonviolent Stuff Will Kill You". Widespread passivity to violent systems is a new phenomenon fashioned by capitalist consumer culture. Leaning on the ruling class' "solutions" is going to do us in.

[@ince55ant]

the establishment absorbed the methods of the civil rights movement. the passivity was effective at that time. now there are a million countermeasures to make them into fools

[@maxgodwin398]

Here’s the problem. If you’re low paid, struggling, unemployed, disabled or otherwise financially disadvantaged your name is already on the great right-wing death list, and you can run out of fingers counting the ways the bastards in power are attempting to destroy your life. If on the other hand you’re middle class, or otherwise relatively financially secure, climate break down is of course the number one concern, via a phenomena I call, ‘Yeah, but this actually affects ME!’. You see, the working class majority, the vast majority of the population, I would speculate, at the back of their minds think, or intuit, ‘what’s the point? Avert climate catastrophe but leave everything else as it is and they’re still going to find a way to destroy me eventually’. Hence the disproportionate number of people involved in the fight against global heating being the relatively financially secure (they have good job prospects, or money in the bank, or a mum and dad who can help), it is pretty much the only thing that’s absolutely guaranteed to rain on their parade in the long run (i.e. their lives). To everyone else the state of the climate is just another in a long line of awaiting, or indeed current, existential catastrophes. If you think that’s overstating the matter, just try being disabled and having your benefits cut, or being threaten with eviction even though you have a full time job. Trust me, these things feel like the end of the world, right here and right now. There’s a reason the cons keep the general population impoverished, or just one or two steps ahead of possible destitution. Most people don’t go out and protest because they’re too busy being overwhelmed by the active existential emergencies being imposed on them, or that they’re being constantly threatened with. It’s not apathy that stops the less financially secure majority taking part and protesting, it’s fear of losing what tiny things they have, and a general lack of mental bandwidth, due to existential stress.

[@phillheth]

Fuck yeah. Kudos to Novara for having the balls to put this out.

[@piyalimendiratta317]

This conversation makes so much sense, it is scary that we are at a point when faffing around the issue will be or is catastrophic.

[@TimothyMusson]

In criticizing Insulate Britain for blocking roads rather than targeting individuals, I wonder if Andreas is falling for media spin. Novara itself has pointed out the misleading coverage by mainstream media. That coverage doesn't represent what's going on in the average person's head. The extreme attitude of mainstream coverage suggests (to me) that Insulate Britain is onto something the ruling class is afraid of. Keep it up.

[@timpauwels3734]

So are the road blocks specifically targeting the forces behind the fossil fuel economy in some way that the media aren’t reporting?

[@jamesstephenson3305]

@@timpauwels3734 The idea is to cause as much disruption to the economy as possible, blocking motorways is probably the best way to do this unfortunately it fucks with the working class. Maybe a less disruptive but more destructive way is better?

[@sarahpengelly8439]

Andreas does not suggest targeting individuals, rather property. Insulate Britain are a gutsy lot but upsetting ordinary people so much is not the way. Just like the XR rebels sitting on a tube train during rush hour. As a member of XR I & many others never wanted that to happen. Targeting banks & fossil fuel infrastructure makes sense, it really does.

[@jamesoneill5070]

Let's have a quick look at the leader of Insulate Britain, Liam Norton. 1. Does he use gas central heating? Yes 2. Is he double glazed? No 3. Does he insulate his own home? No Let's now look at Emma Smart, another Insulate Britain hypocrite. She has just completed an 81,000 world trip across 50 countries in a gas guzzling 18 year old 4x4 and now wants to stop you driving to work. And how about directing your protests at China and India . How about a quick trip to both countries to protest. Too frightened? Thought so.

[@jamesstephenson3305]

@@jamesoneill5070 yawn, the group is asking the government to help people insulate their homes, no for people to just go and do it off their own back. But okay.

[@markb7614]

In the topic of XR's action at Canning Town tube and the seemingly shambolic and inadequate political explainations of Insulate Britain's media representations, I think it's impossible not to take into account the stratergies of the establishment agent provocateur. Wether well meaning and nieve, it could be seen that these kinds of actions are ameturr at best and are very easy to position and frame in a negative light. If one thing needs to be learnt from the history of policing political movements in the UK, its that the use of uncover operatives becoming entrenched at the highest levels of movements (reference IRA, Reclaim the Streets, Road protest movement, Animal rights movement) has historically been very successful. Seeing very earnet, highly commited activists be ripped apart on breakfast shows with images of working class people pulling their hair out, while trying to take their kids to school is hugly disempowering and directly causes the mass of the populus to switch off and fail to engage in the messaging. This is clearly walking into an obvious trap. The state has proven time and time again that it will stop at nothing to protect its position and time and time again revolutionary movements have underestimated their opponents. Modern activists must look to the lessons of the past, its clear to see. For starters, essential reading is a book by Frank Kitson called Low Intensity Operations, which is a handbook for state operatives when dealing with radical political movements.

[@BasilBear]

Thank you for your helpful thoughts on this.

[@sarahpengelly8439]

Excellent thoughts. The public being distracted by the messenger & not focusing on the real terrifying message.

[@michaelrch]

Great discussion. It would be interesting to see Malm and Roger Hallam discussing strategy.

[@tamsinemily]

WHEN: today Wednesday 10th November 2pm. WHERE: JP Morgan Chase, 45 Waterloo St, Glasgow. Indigenous Climate Action have put a call out to join Frontline Leaders directly impacted by extraction funded by JP Morgan Chase in delivering their demands for the bank to completely stop financing fossil fuels.

[@poetpropheticabdielleroy3917]

Property destruction and sabotage are not violence.

[@robertwinslade3104]

Novara here seeing if they can get their channel deleted for a second time. You're doing good work though; these kind of conversations need to be had

[@homosexualpanic]

Yeah don't allow Google et Al to censor these important conversations

[@robertwinslade3104]

@@Marvin-dg8vj And upon what do you base this assumption?

[@seanjanion1]

This was a really interesting and informative discussion. thank you for making it Aaron and the Novara team!

[@katieannerm]

I think it’s important to note that the Xr standing on strategic non-violence is based off of the extensive research on Erica Chenoweth which is based off analysing the success of historic movements and found that overwhelming non-violent movements are more successful. Plus I think there’s a really interesting conversation to be had about whether property damage is even violent. If you look at the recent actions such as the smashing of bank windows and the shell 7 case I think there’d be an argument to be made that XR does not see property damage as inherently violent. Also there’s some interesting research about radical (possibly violent) flanks and their impact in overall movements suggesting that we need a strong diversity of tactics between groups rather then the suggestion that we all need to change into more overtly violent actions

[@sarahpengelly8439]

Katie, a good analysis here & like Andreas suggests we have to be creative & wide ranging in our actions from now onwards.

[@royloveday4350]

A really interesting discussion. I've often thought a better tactic would be to put the biggest player in any given sector under intense pressure rather than a dissolved approach targeting a whole sector, because the biggest player has the most to loose. In a world where people have to buy fuel they can still choose to not buy it from BP for instance. We have to live in the system to work and survive but now we can all join in with something more laser targeted. You'd need to get the messaging right but basically you could seriously threaten the bottom line of one company and demonstrate to a whole sector you are serious and have popular support for change. Plummeting share prices concentrate minds.

[@wilfredsterling2124]

I think the wider public would support the sinking of super yachts and smashing up their private jets. ....

[@gstevef]

Ministry of the Future - read it, you'll love it. See children of Kali in there.

[@lincolnthedescription4503]

lol...no you lunatic.

[@wilfredsterling2124]

I have read a review and will read...thanks for the recommendation.

[@davidparry5310]

@@lincolnthedescription4503 Why are simping for the rich?

[@lincolnthedescription4503]

@@davidparry5310 I don't think you know what simp means, but I know lunatics when I see them.

[@resilientfarmsanddesignstu1702]

The problem with destroying private or public energy supply infrastructure and then claiming that you are doing it to prevent future deaths is that the costs of the property damaged and the lives dependent upon that energy and the harm to them from energy disruption can be readily estimated while the costs associated with future speculative injuries and deaths associated with the GHGs emitted and the future heat waves that are likely to result from that emittance are not. Thus any court of law would have to side with the oil companies. A better way to stop the pipeline is to stop the DEMAND for oil.

[@jerryfeelgood8455]

Violence is a tool. We use it every day in one form or another. It's part of life and it is, above all, a necessity. If you don't believe me, try building a house without cutting down trees, smashing stones or disturbing the earth. Existence is not viable without it. So the question of whether violence is acceptable or not is incredibly silly. If it is necessary - meaning, if no other, more efficient alternatives exist to reach your goal - then that's the end of the debate. And all the pearl-clutching hypocrites who deny this, are resting on privileges that were fought for, won and are being henceforth defended every single day *with violence*. I believe that most people who run around wagging their fingers moralizing about violence are simply in denial about the fact that's it not actually the violence, they oppose - but the end to which it's being used. And as for the question, why people don't choose more violent (and effective) means to achieve their goals, I think the answer is: convenience and/or a lifetime of liberal ideology. Ideology, because I don't believe it's an accident or coincidence that this revisionist history permeates. It's an intentional means to misinform the public, whether the people responsible know that they're lying or not. And just think about demonstrations: a mob of angry people roaming the streets used to be an actual threat that had to be taken seriously. Now what we have are highly regulated spectacles that function more to legitimize the ruling class (we have free speech!) rather than bring about actual change. Because the ruling class stopped being afraid of them, the moment they were allowed to dictate what is and isn't an appropriate and lawful method for the masses of opposing them! Convenience, because for many, the effects of climate breakdown are still purely abstract - at least they feel less real than the very real fear of losing your job, going to prison or getting brutalized by the cops.

[@bencobley4929]

Roughly 40 people risking violence targeting the M27 and other motorways got huge media attention you cant take that away from them. Id love to here more analysis on Insulate Britain, Get Roger Harlem on, interview him or someone else from the group. These people got balls of steel, they are ready to go all the way. Don't knock that, get behind them and help.

[@brianwheeldon4643]

Thanks Novara

[@kacrichton4434]

Blm and les gillets jaunes do not have "violence" as part of their approach to activism. The gillets jaunes go on marches and sit at roundabouts, blm go on marches and defend themselves from aggression. Then to lay the perceived difference between them and ER as the level of education... that is shameful.

[@timpauwels3734]

In my reading, this interview lauded BLM and the Gillet Jaunes’ approach to activism and criticised XR…

[@DruuzilTechGames]

On what planet is BLM peaceful and "defending themselves"? BLM murdered 23 people last year.

[@resilientfarmsanddesignstu1702]

If external suppliers (such as oil companies) control your life support, then they control you. They own you. They own your thoughts, values, actions and your vote. There can be no liberty (as defined per Lord Acton as the freedom to do what you ought, to act in accordance with your conscience to do the ethically correct thing) if you are controlled by outside providers, whether by big government or by big business. So the first step in addressing global warming ought to be to make the citizenry independent of external suppliers for their life support needs -- including their energy needs. Since they will no longer be dependent, they will have liberty and they will exercise their newfound liberty to as address climate change. Therefore, dependency and the lack of liberty are THE PROBLEM as this explains why there is no active public civil disobedience and pressure against big oil and climate change. It's pretty obvious. Intellectuals are still debating the ethical questions. Instead they need to address these root causes and roll up their sleeves and DO something. Otherwise, failing to do anything of substance, they will be remembered by history and future generations as the "Did Nothing" generations -- or more simply as just "The Did Nothings"!

[@Redsauce101]

Hello National Domestic Extremism Unit. :P

[@drakinkoren]

Here's me wondering what collection of letters will be interested in us all now, haha!

[@Redsauce101]

@@drakinkoren To be fair a have no doubt he's already on a database somewhere owing to the UK's propensity to illegally monitor left-wing groups and people.

[@drakinkoren]

@@Redsauce101 It's only a matter of time before he matches with one of their operatives on Tinder... 😬

[@iggsolo]

Could you post subtitles for this interview? I would love to share the interview with my non-English-speaking friends.

[@markcotton3481]

You should take the time to translate for them, then. Don't be lazy.

[@nealmctaggart7229]

Can you translate through the CC tab in the top right of the video?

[@Linz0440]

I thought Andreas was Irish when I first heard him speak! Great guest.

[@dtrellis]

I've noticed that a few times with Nordic people that when speaking English they can seem to have a tinge of an Irish accent.. there is a bit of shared Viking heritage between those nations a thousand years ago I guess?

[@scrumpopulous]

surprised this has so few views. really important critique of current activist strategies

[@nacnud2323]

Ironically sponsored by Eon

[@shonas9217]

What is sponsored by Eon?

[@MrBuycycle]

@@shonas9217 KZbin ad with Eon greenwash

[@shonas9217]

@@MrBuycycle the content creator has zero control over the ads and Novara is not sponsored by Eon. I got an ad for Tru Earth Laundry Detergent.

[@MrBuycycle]

​@@shonas9217 Misunderstanding. I know Novara media has no control over the youtube ads, they're just algorithmically generated. My gripe's with Eons faux concern with the environment.

[@davidparry5310]

@@magburner 'We should improve society somewhat.' 'Yet you participate in society. Curious. I am very intelligent!'

[@islandsedition]

Gotta be careful with people's perception of property. In the UK, property has not been elevated to the importance of a human life. In the USA you can defend your property to the point of death. In the UK, normally killing someone can only be justified in cases of self defence, however there has been a growing push toward the same mentality as the USA whereby preventing trespass or theft without any immediate fear for your own life can justify killing someone.

[@theax40]

If a dude is breaking into my house at 2am to steal my tv, it's completely reasonable to assume he's also willing to do harm to me. He is a criminal, after all, and criminals often go to extreme lengths to not get caught. I don't really give a fuck what they think about private property in the UK. You break into my house, you're getting put down. I'm not giving you the benefit of the doubt, that's how innocent people end up dead.

[@islandsedition]

@@theax40 the situation you describe would probably be covered by UK law as the victim needs to have a reasonable belief that their life or the life of someone else was under threat. A 2am break in would probably qualify. However, if you shoot the guy who is running away with your TV or car...then that would rightly not be covered. Generally you can get away with that action in the USA. Property should never be elevated to being more important than a life. That's what insurance is for. It also avoids people with mental health or poverty issues getting killed needlessly. The fact that people are so fierce in defending their property simply shows that they are feeding on the dregs of the economic system even when they think they are quite well off.

[@zoedaisy1499]

@@islandsedition not of Corbyn was in power it’d would be Chris going to jail and the intruder getting a massive pay out from Chris and the tax payer

[@islandsedition]

@@zoedaisy1499 you've never actually looked at how the legal system works have you...? Or how laws are made for that matter.

[@zoedaisy1499]

@@islandsedition I’m saying if Corbyn was in power he would legislate laws to enact a situation whereby Chris would get done and the intruder heralded a hero. What don’t I understand about a PM legislating laws in parliament?

[@PhoebeMostafa]

Black Lives Matter as a movement is both easy to understand and one that people can easily identify with. We are against crimes against black people who are suffering now, people we know. Climate emergency is very different. It's not easy to understand (we have to know the science to see the extent of the dangers). How many people can say 'I understand the climate emergency'? People start talking about pollution and mixing it up with climate change, which shows their ignorance, as an example. Even when they do understand, we haven't seen the totally catastrophic effects that will be inevitable once the tipping points are reached, so it's not in our experience, like racial violence is, to some extent or other. Climate emergency is new, you have to get your head around it. How many people want to get their head around difficult concepts? 'Nah, didn't do science at school' is a common reaction, as well as a distrust of people who are educated enough to understand it. Targeting the people to hike up their awareness is much more difficult than it sounds. Targeting the climate change instigators make more sense.

[@janearmstrong7945]

Roger Hallam very is very clear that protest is not a nice clean peacefully business.

[@janearmstrong7945]

Non violence can get quite messes, it's not a lovely my little pony activity and XR never claim that is. Lefties should not confuse the type of Lentil eating hippies (who might piss them off) who are often in XR to what the original strategy is. In the 80s young Marxists had contempt for the early greens just because of they type of people the greens were. The greens interest was limiting growth and they could not careless about the Marxist framework which pissed the Marxist right off. It turns out the early greens were more on point that the 80s Marxists who where totally thrown off by the fall of the USSR and spent about 10 years sulking. Lefties today should not make the same mistake of dismissing green type people just because are not their bag. My bet is younger people will find some sort of elderly lentil weaver to be their Jermery Corbyn.

[@hanhartminos2617]

"Deep Green Resistance" by Derrick Jensen and "Full Spectrum Resistance" by Aric McBay

[@pgantioch8362]

Why is our poor response to climate change mysterious? Not only is the problem slow-developing & global, it’s very difficult to change people’s behavior. Besides, oil is the largest, wealthiest, most powerful industry in the history of the world. Basic strategy in WW-2 centered around oil. Despite hits to their market cap, they (& other fossil fuel companies) still have enormous amounts of money to buy politicians. They’ll fight climate change meadows to the death.

[@hoodedmexican]

One of the best takeaways at the end is that developing nations can/should also switch to renewables and green infra so that they can continue developing without contributing to the destruction of their own areas. No one has to worsen their country in this switch, watch Not Just Bike’s video on this exact topic to learn more about the infra portion of this.

[@alexstacey]

Excellent chat. Great guest. Thanks

[@royloveday4350]

Did the tactics of Insulate Britain, rightly questioned, build a swift platform and spring board thier point quickly up the agenda allowing them to now move forward? It seems to me despite or perhaps because of its contradictions it has been quite a media savvy operation, if now they use the platform they have in a more appropriately targeted way?

[@Orclin]

"Let's destroy the only thing they keeps our civilization afloat!" - Global Warmongers 2021

[@davidparry5310]

Global warmongers? I think you have us confused with the American state. As for civilisation, I'd say that capitalism is endangering its future rather keeping it afloat.

[@gaetanboyer]

Thanks for this Novara media. Getting to grips with mass apathy and how to spark a sense a engagement with our climate future is what's needed now. Finding tactics that crystallize and empower us to participate in action is exactly the conversations we need to be having

[@sarahpengelly8439]

Gaetan mass apathy? We refer to it as the 'indifferent majority'. Yes, it's difficult to comprehend.

[@gaetanboyer]

@@sarahpengelly8439 thanks Sarah that's a clearer way of describing how people in general are dealing with the climate crisis

[@jfinnweddle4629]

I thought 'pahh, an hour, that's long for youtube' I stayed Lots and lots of ground covered in that hour!!

[@0211brucetube]

This was a massive breath of fresh air from the usual Labour Party shilling shit Novara dabbles in, really good interview

[@TheRealTrentRazor]

I really really wish they would ditch mainstream politics and use their platform to raise the profile of more radical politics. Agreed, this video was great, would love more of it!

[@eldrago19]

Eh, what? There've been a lot of negative segments about Keir Starmer on NM and I can't remember a single positive one tbh. The closest they've come to Labour shilling that I've seen was criticising Galloway for being an opportunist and a social conservative.

[@cpstr828]

Pretty good balanced take by Mr Malm regarding China. Novara isn't too bad but it still does tend to be a bit too positive about the Chinese regime. Probably trying to counteract Western imperialist propaganda which is legit.. They might also have a touch simplistic view on the benefits of state intervention.

[@ClarkKentsRockandRollRevue]

Pretty damn good, though it has to be clearly stated that BLM distanced themselves from those who were into destroying property. The likening of violence in other human rights movements across the ages is safer ground for Malm's point.

[@theax40]

They clearly didn't do a very good job "distancing themselves." They routinely refused the police entry into areas they had control over and then did nothing when bad people destroyed property, burned down buildings and murdered people. I wouldn't claim that all BLM protestors were burning, looting and murdering, even though it fits the acronym. But the fact of the matter is the protests created a situation where those things happened and they facilitated it. They didn't do nearly enough and they should never be forgiven for it.

[@ClarkKentsRockandRollRevue]

@@theax40 I don't think it's possible to stage what BLM did as though they were one unifying collective or company. The critique in your comment seems to ignore the realities of a mass gathering that fundamentally distrusted the police and offered the world a much needed wake up call. I don't think they are asking for forgiveness, let alone tips on how to orchestrate a response to yet another example of state sponsored murder. It's far too easy to be an armchair critique on movements that wouldn't have occurred if one adopts a rose tinted view of resistance activities of the past.

[@TheQeltar]

@@theax40 Yes, they should have burned down more police stations. They will never be forgiven for it.

[@theax40]

@@ClarkKentsRockandRollRevue Look at the comment right under yours. See what I mean?

[@shackleton12]

@@theax40 Not letting armed police into the midst of a demonstration in response to police violence sounds like a totally reasonable self-defense measure, and absolutely proportionate. If the police cannot be trusted to behave within the law at a demonstration, then it is absolutely their fault that lawlessness occurs at demonstrations, whether it is the police doing it, or the protestors. Ultimately, both stem from the inability of police to engender the trust required for them to do their jobs.

[@superbananas7792]

We need less nicy nicy and more fighty fighty. N fuck the whole "Don't get political" from XR, this whole situation is political, our daily lives are, this entire situation has been created by Capitalism and unjust hierarchical organisation. Pacifism has never lead to real social change, it directly protects the Stateus quo infact and what we need now is real change, revolutionary social change.

[@Neuroticmancer]

Read The Ministry For The Future!

[@robertwinslade3104]

Such a great conversation

[@jesuispeanut264]

when uncle ted meets greta, authored by andreas malm

[@MartinJames389]

There are things to be learned from the movement which stopped the roads programme in the 1990s and fought the Manchester airport expansion (unsuccessfully in that case). Superficially that was the sort of "strategic pacifism" discussed here and was mostly white, middle class people. But that wasn't the whole story by any means. I will not say more, but pixies need something to do when not helping Santa Claus, you know. The upshot was that the roads programme collapsed not because the government wanted to scrap it, but it got too expensive for the contractors who pulled out facing no profits or even losses. Delay costs money and so does security. If the security has been infiltrated it can even become counter-productive! It's not "the answer" of course, but a contribution. We need to look again at how to make planet-trashing too expensive for capitalism to turn a profit. This is particularly relevant to bad stuff one or another government is paying for -and there's a lot of that around.

[@dansargison]

Ah, that explains why the HS2 contracts were different, charging government coats plus x%, so as activists cause issues, the security and HS2 ltd just keep making more money. It now makes sense how they have carried on despite huge public outcry.

[@erebusvonmori8050]

@@dansargison That's very much the lesson here, strategic pacifism and peaceful protest were incredibly powerful tools in the previous century but they've been adapted to and negated in this one.

[@sscoutistaken]

Took back my like because there was no mention of the big countries refusing to subsidize China and India so they could move away from coal in COP26.

[@mrquasar2922]

none really cares about the environment

[@nickjanczak9665]

Breath of fresh air - except there is no fresh air!

[@o_o8203]

black lives matters, as an organisation, doesnt engage in property destruction. its almost always disenfranchised people or instigators taking advantage of the protests to engage in property destruction (which i am not against).

[@lincolnthedescription4503]

property destruction is wrong

[@totonow6955]

Love this Child of Kali. I think it is scary to go up against the rich without a lot more people. They are going to mow us down.

[@tomp8632]

Yes!

[@magicmuesli]

Really interesting conversation, Malm's case here and in the book (how to...) are very convincing.. That the strictly pacifist approach has been a key on one hand in making movements like XR broadly attractive/safe/accessible to many and broadly ineffective. On the other hand, many, many people DO or would wish to take effective action against the fossil fuel industry but the idea of sabotaging infrastructure seems like a huge step up in terms of personal risk, means, know how, etc. For this strategy to be sufficiently scalable to be effectual (rather than a small militant fringe) how can everyday people be emboldened, supported and organised to participate in this?

[@leskuzyk2425]

did Insulate not shut down a private jet airport in the UK ?

[@anshumanjaiswal5787]

Who cares ? Dare to permanently shut down commerical air transport and workers will beat the shit out of them .

[@monikawiedmann8594]

Excellent interview!

[@franciscobermejo1779]

Raising awareness about a long term, difficult to feel in your everyday life issue by creating acute crisis that hurt the people that need to help you the most, and with the possibility of environmental damage or even casualties? Yep that's always worked great

[@petersvancarek]

This is difficult dilemma. It will not stop unless they reach point were they will have enough energy. They too want to enjoy the advancement of western countries. Look from their point of view. Why didn't we, the westerners stopped to use fossil fuels yet? Stop burning gas and coal. What will happen? We see what is happening now when russians are not sending enough gas into Europe. Energy crisis. Renewables aren't good source if you want stable electric net. Not Yet!

[@Gezira]

Not yet because we haven't done anything substantial.

[@neoliberalism_sucks]

It will be a matter of storage and sharing supply with neighbouring countries. Some interesting ideas arising around unconventional battery's. Projects more in line with hydro electric style storage.

[@Salomane]

For one, Europe didn’t have the chance to transition its energy infrastructure away from fossil fuels under its own accord. Russia cut them off. China is possibly more of an example of struggling to create a more self-reliant energy grid while transitioning away from fossil fuels because of its stand off with western powers (it was relating on Australia for coal, part of AUKUS). And it is a struggle. But the asterisk here is the those western powers opportunistic interference accelerating plans otherwise and trying to siege. But climate change also presence a economic structural problem. Economy’s seem resistant to such a radical change to its infrastructure and the pressures of climate change makes it hard to move away from cheap sources (and politically powerful fossil fuel industry certainly doesn’t want change away from a profitable model). Culture is resistant to such radical changes as well. And people collectively themselves are not equipped to handle such radical change without consequences. But if we continue as we are in the hope or faith that science and technology will save us, we will end up doing nothing and be totally screwed. Which is not an option. As I’m beginning to see it. Climate change is a challenge to our western understandings of “progress” and “production” itself and how we think. If we continue with the profit model outside the limitation of our environment it won’t just be Africa and Latin America that suffer. Those continents are just the beginning.

[@Gezira]

@@Salomane I basically agree with you, imho a good analysis. A radical change is required, before economic, a cultural one, the sooner people understand it, the less painful it will be. Though, as you said, most (or a large part) of society for one reason or another still opposes it. But times are changing, rapidly, I'm afraid the time for a passive opposition, for patience is running out. I'm afraid that at some point a critical mass of the younger generations will understand that they have nothing to lose and there could be a violent struggle and summary justice. I believe and hope that the European political class is becoming aware of this catastrophic, not only from an environmental but also from a social point of view, scenario. Today's is a very unstable equilibrium, they will have to break it consciously and make enemies among the capitalist class, I don't think there are many other possibilities.

[@Gezira]

@@harry.flashman there are many practical problems but they are not beyond our reach, which means that if society wants such a thing to happen, it will happen. Certainly not without sacrifices but also with real gains. I'm pretty sure of that.

[@raymondhodgson1190]

Interesting discussion. IMO, the biggest reason for inaction is the link between fossil fuels and nationalism, including but not limited to military power. Attacking fossil fuel infrastructure is a step below treason in some ways. It attacks the entire economy, and can bring down governments. In great power conflicts, the state that has access to these resources has an inherent advantage over a similar state that doesn’t. WWII is a clear example of that. Even people who don't know about the history still have a sense of that, which makes it difficult.

[@jennyhowell127]

Fantastic discussion. I've stayed well away from COP26 because I can't bear the heavy stampede of capitalism using climate change to push more growth. This is the real stuff. I would have liked to hear discussion about the effects on the global South of lithium/cobalt mining etc., but you only had an hour tbf!

[@dodododatdatdat]

surprised the yt would allow a video like this

[@starky497]

Extinction Rebellion’s adoption of peaceful civil disobedience as its primary protest strategy is at least in part informed by the work of Erica Chenoweth, her historic analysis that establishes peaceful insurrections as being far more effective than violent forms of the same. Rather than being a mistake as Bastani’s suggests, the adoption of peaceful means follows the rationale derived from a robust analysis by a serious academic. This might not be the best or only way forward but it’s inaccurate to suggest that somehow XR’s approach lacks intellectual rigour.

[@sarahpengelly8439]

Starkey 497 I'm aware of the literature around this but maybe our pathway to certain extinction requires different & more brutal techniques now. Over the course of two years mass mobilisation to the level required has not happened. Maybe some other tactic is need as well. I would love to see a variety of climate action groups working closely alongside each other now.

[@cian5069]

Would you ever have Max Ajl on?

[@arfived4]

The problem with Insulate Britain's tactics, and who they are targetting, feeds back to a point made at the start of the interview. The climate movement is by and of the bourgeois "protestariat", and like the bourgeois movements before them, are far more comfortable pinning the blame on "the moral and intellectual failing of the poor", rather than challenge their peers with social power

[@JugglinJellyTake01]

Saul Alinsky in his book Rules for Radicals was very clear that you cannot go into a community and expect to change their views without first understanding and addressing their problems. Insulate Britain need to target councils and appropriate government departments to push for more energy efficiency and more importantly taking landlords to court for failing to maintain wind tight, water tight and energy efficient homes. If the aim is to empower and then mobilise the working class, the precariat, the unemployed, the homeless and refugees then it is at the local government and government departments that action needs to take place. Housing unions are part of this mix while Insulate Britain could be demanding a more proactive response. Such a strategy would also tie in with the need to divest public pensions from fossil fuels and reinvest the funds into arms length social housing, public transport and energy efficiency companies.

[@gstevef]

Councils are among the good guys - lots of us working inside the state are held back by the same forces you experience.

[@jacobbarlow7034]

Is effective action necessarily the most just and sensible action? Piss off a lot of people and you'll get noticed, whether those people deserve it or not. They'll direct their ire at you, sure, but they'll want to bring the strongest argument against you, so they'll go with, 'Of course they're right, but I disagree with their *methods*'. In their enthusiasm to condemn you, they'll accept the premise of your protest.

[@gstevef]

Aaron I think you're a bit dismissive of the China discussion. I'd really love Novara to catch John Bellamy Foster (no relation!) next time he's here, set up a debate perhaps? But thanks, this was a great interview, and I'll get his books!

[@nowthenzen]

any thought that a Chinese hegemon will be a kinder or a velvet glove hegemony is a pipedream. Hegemons are gonna Hegemon

[@jwise9013]

So encouraging people to break the law and vandalise and destroy property is ok now is it ?

[@burner9147]

yes

[@jwise9013]

@@burner9147 Right so how is that an ok thing to do if anyone else advocated for destruction like this they would be arrested for inciting violence etc, but coz cLiMaTe ChAnGe it’s ok?

[@burner9147]

@@jwise9013 lol wRiTiNg cLiMaTe ChAnGe like that does not make it seem silly. Look dim wit I unfortunately I don't have the time to create a short show with sock puppets to explain to you how bad climate change is going to get but MILLIONS will die and that is the best-case scenario. the actions of these few oil executives and the politicians they have brought will cause so much suffering that the destruction of property is completely justified

[@jwise9013]

@@burner9147 Millions will die you do not know that at all you bloody fool you’ve just been told that

[@nobody4248]

If the law is unjust it should be broken.

[@ZetsumeiIkari]

i've been saying thunberg wrong

[@JayFortran]

TOONburrah?😀

[@Psychotol]

It seemed a bit weird to go on some tangent on "oh, people worship private property" when there's actually practical concerns on both property rights and on optics that seemed to be overlooked. Bad optics = fewer votes = less likely to get your preferred candidate elected, yes, democracy is an ad populum fallacy, but it's what we got, so ... yeah ... You keep forgetting that normal people (most of hte electorate) use "private property" and "personal property" interchangeably, and there's this idea that "the state will run out of rich peoples stuff to confiscate and your stuff, person who barely makes enough to live and barely has £10.05 of anything at all, your stuff is next" that (fallaciously, by pro-capitalist advocates) gets pushed. There's no end of items where people on the left seem to want to lose, like "abolish whiteness, ('cos, see what we did there? Whiteness you see is this archaic term meaning racial hierarchy, so by saying 'abolish whiteness' instead of 'abolish racial heirarchy', we sound a trillion times cleaverer, you see? What could possibly go wrong?)" and (predictably, no really, predictably, no,m actually, really really actually, this is predictably) ordinary fuckers that need to be gotten on side go "Okay, sure, let's do more genocide to balance things out, Thanos style. Dipshits." Or, "Abolish Gender ('cos, see what we did there? Gender is this archaic term that's different from Sex which describes all the purely social stuff, so we sound twelve trillion times cleaverer when we say 'abolish gender' in place of 'abolish gender roles', you see? What could possibly go wrong?)" where most ordinary fuckers who use 'sex' amnd 'gender' interchangeably be like "Erm ... sure ... let's genetically modify the next generation onwards to be monogendered like the Asari, shall we also genetically write in their headcrests too? Dipshits." this is somethign that comes up time and again across multiple topics and it's more than a little maddening.

[@lsobrien]

You seem to get your education of the Left from LBC and Telegraph headlines.

[@pseudonamed]

Yeah it’s really frustrating to hear the left using academic terminology outside of academia with no regard for how it’s going to be interpreted by the average person. As someone who grew up working class I keep cringing at how a lot of middle class people in the left communicate things

[@1o1s1s1i1e]

You need a leader with vision like Che Guevara that can bring groups together with a focus on unifying goals.

[@theax40]

Che Guevara? You mean the racist homophobe? That's what you want, racist gaybashers leading your protest movements?

[@zoedaisy1499]

@@theax40 yes that’s what they want cos this lot are a bunch of kids in love with the romance and unaware or simply ignore the reality

[@lsobrien]

@@theax40 "I watched a 5 minute hatchet job of a deeply complex and globally inspiring man, and I say: Che bad. We have nothing to learn from him." I would ask you to expand but I wouldn't want to hurt your head.

[@jangomoonstomp]

@@theax40 you already have racist homophobes leading your movements, fascists as well to top it off.

[@TheQeltar]

@@theax40 You would know considering who you subscribe to.

[@pgantioch8362]

The US is responsible for the biggest chunk of current atmospheric CO2, but the country most responsible for warming up to 2013 was the UK (source: J Hansen, Storms of My Grandchildren)! The US took over as the #1 emitter around 1920, & that continued till China took over in 2005 (except briefly in the late 30s, when the UK was gearing up for war before the US). The point: there is a long delay, perhaps a century, between emissions & warming. Barring extreme measures, the US will be most responsible for warming during the 21st century.

[@ClearFiend]

About time we had some radical folk on 🤩😎

[@nUmBskulLL]

Are you mad? We need power to live you muppets. If you're pissed about all the old people who have no power in their homes during this cold winter, I wouldn't advocate sabotaging an energy supply. unless you could provide an alternative on the same day.

[@theax40]

Hello fellow domestic terrorists. My name is Not FBI Guy. Don't mind me, I'm just here to listen.

[@mnmmnm8321]

It's all about jobs! Some peoples job is enterprise itself and socialist tree hugging ideals don't lead to a tax base because tree huggers don't consume...

[@martiansoon9092]

Even "net zero" is not enough and is a misleading lie. We should seek true zero and even then negative emissions, like seaweed/kelp farming.

[@tommccloskey2261]

This is all crap!

[@jangomoonstomp]

Thanks for your input Tom. We'll process your feedback and file it appropriately.

[@burner9147]

Even if the truth upsets you climate change is happening and all non violent methods of preventing it don't seem to be working so......

[@charlottelatinda633]

I'm.. 50 a.n.d m.y. husband 54 we are both retired with over $3 million in net worth and no debt's. Currently living smart and frugal with our money.serving and investing life style in the stock market made it possible for us this early even till now we earn weekly. Thanks to fire movement.

[@harleylewiston8255]

Great job with your husband! I bet you are living your best life right now.

[@liamwood770]

I'm a young dad, I'm really glad to hear your story it inspires me.

[@andrewpaul311]

What is fire movement please.?

[@charlottelatinda633]

@@andrewpaul311 Fire means Financial Independence Retire Early. It's been a movement teaching people financial independence and how to retire debt free through solid investment and frugal lifestyle.

[@audreybutler1417]

@@charlottelatinda633 Your story is inspiring I'm 38 trying to achieve this goal you achieved.share some tips please so others can actually learn. You haven't still share any idea on how you earn weekly.

[@poneill65]

Amusing to see a beneficiary of a Scandinavian social system belittling the huge benefits (even if flawed) of that system, WITHOUT any understanding of the bestial nature of the system in the UK, systematically forcing millions into despair. Also not so amusing to see someone living under a Scandinavian justice system, with sentences, conditions and rehab akin to a spa retreat in other nations, trying to rouse others to violent action.

[@Banelion001]

Aside from your amusement or lack of it, have you got any arguments as to why what he says might be wrong? Also, have you considered that he does what he does because of the billions outside of Sweden, who will suffer if nothing is done? Not everyone always calculates pros and cons solely for themselves, though I do admit some people have a hard time grasping that concept.

[@mr.p.7021]

Interesting that he uses a utilitarian argument to justify the destruction of a pipeline. What about the opposite of how many lives will be saved if it is built. The exponential growth in human populations is directly linked to industrialisation as is the relative wealth and comfort of humanity. In terms of pure utility it is perhaps a stronger argument for continuing the use of fossil fuels. It is the problem with extremist views, they are narrow and often miss the wider ramifications.

[@Zara-jl5zw]

It's all about finance new boilers new electric cars insulation all to keep you borrowing and junk the old stuff so you have to buy new 😂😂😂💩 the biggest saving device ever☝️ turn the lights off 😂😂

[@smokyondagrass2353]

The red army faction solution to climate change. At this point what do we have to loose

[@ThomasPaineintheArse]

Freedom is the answer to every problem. There are no perfect solutions; everything is a trade-off. Grow up.

[@davidparry5310]

There is no solution to be found in notions of 'freedom' that are serviceable to the status quo.

[@yourmumshouse117]

So, inciting violence is a crime, just saying...

[@lsobrien]

I'm sure the Crowder and Carlgon fan is genuinely very concerned with the consequences provocative language may have.

[@jangomoonstomp]

Killing the planet is pretty bad too, just saying.

[@yourmumshouse117]

@@jangomoonstomp name the crime and the perpetrator of said crime. You've basically said, "doing bad things is bad". - umm duh?

[@gaetanboyer]

Thanks for this Novara media. Getting to grips with mass apathy and how to spark a sense a engagement with our climate future is what's needed now. Finding tactics that crystallize and empower us to participate in action is exactly the conversations we need to be having.

[@jangomoonstomp]

@@carlosdelins8070 what if you can afford to have a child but it turns out to be deficient in the vital organ department? Like you having no heart for instance, and very little evidence of a brain.