Activists jet 12000 miles - to climate meeting!! For Real???
Marianne Orantes - student from Madrid & London | 29.03.2010 13:04
Is this for real? I cannot believe that this is absolutely genuine. I know it's the Mail but if it is then the hypocrisy is astounding. What on earth makes these people believe that Joe Public won't regard them in the same devisive vein that they regard politicians who claim for duck houses and porn on their expenses. The mind boggles
Activists jet 12,000 miles - to climate change meeting
By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 10:53 PM on 27th March 2010
* Comments (41)
* Add to My Stories
Climate change activists opposed to air travel are travelling to a conference in South America...by plane.
Campaigners from Climate Camp -- who helped blockade Heathrow at the height of the summer holidays in 2007 -- face claims of hypocrisy having decided to send two members to an international meeting in Bolivia to discuss ‘transnational protests’ against climate change.
The 12,000-mile round trip to the Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights conference next month involves changing planes at least twice.
climate camp
Campaigners for climate camp are travelling to a conference in South America - by plane
The flights will generate about eight tons of carbon dioxide greenhouse gases.
The money for their tickets -- at least £1,200 for an economy fare -- is being paid for by donations to Climate Camp from people opposed to flying and airport expansion.
One of the campaigners making the trip is Agnes Szafranowska.
Ms Szafranowska, a Canadian who now lives in London, organises Climate Camp workshops and was involved in the Great Climate Swoop on Ratcliffe power station in Nottingham last October.
Police arrested ten people before the protest began on suspicion of conspiracy to cause criminal damage.
Some 1,000 people took part, and security fencing around the plant was pulled down. Police made 56 arrests and a number of people were injured, including one policeman who had to be airlifted to hospital.
Ms Szafranowska failed to answer questions sent to her by email, other than to say that Climate Camp were preparing a statement.
The group’s Press officer did not return calls.
Mail on Sunday 28 March 2010
By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 10:53 PM on 27th March 2010
* Comments (41)
* Add to My Stories
Climate change activists opposed to air travel are travelling to a conference in South America...by plane.
Campaigners from Climate Camp -- who helped blockade Heathrow at the height of the summer holidays in 2007 -- face claims of hypocrisy having decided to send two members to an international meeting in Bolivia to discuss ‘transnational protests’ against climate change.
The 12,000-mile round trip to the Climate Change and Mother Earth’s Rights conference next month involves changing planes at least twice.
climate camp
Campaigners for climate camp are travelling to a conference in South America - by plane
The flights will generate about eight tons of carbon dioxide greenhouse gases.
The money for their tickets -- at least £1,200 for an economy fare -- is being paid for by donations to Climate Camp from people opposed to flying and airport expansion.
One of the campaigners making the trip is Agnes Szafranowska.
Ms Szafranowska, a Canadian who now lives in London, organises Climate Camp workshops and was involved in the Great Climate Swoop on Ratcliffe power station in Nottingham last October.
Police arrested ten people before the protest began on suspicion of conspiracy to cause criminal damage.
Some 1,000 people took part, and security fencing around the plant was pulled down. Police made 56 arrests and a number of people were injured, including one policeman who had to be airlifted to hospital.
Ms Szafranowska failed to answer questions sent to her by email, other than to say that Climate Camp were preparing a statement.
The group’s Press officer did not return calls.
Mail on Sunday 28 March 2010
Marianne Orantes - student from Madrid & London
Additions
we are all implicit
30.03.2010 08:52
I am writing this on a computer, later I will be carrying my mobile and driving my car to work, I will however walk to the shops, the dentist and I have no central heating, furthermore I limit my carbon and water footprint by being a vegan who buys locally/organic where possible. I have often thought about how I could manage to be active without a car, without a mobile, without a computer but whilst our enemies have all these things and more we cannot simply put all of our energies into living a pure carbon free life. We could not for example go out against the local hunts.
I once went sabbing on a mountain bike with just one other person in Cumbria and we were constantly mobbed but fortunately the hunt felt so sorry for us they did not attack us, we were effective but it is handy to have a landie. To go sabbing or to try and get a mobile demo going without mobiles would be very hard especially as there are now no phone boxes that work. Recently 4 of us had to get to Newcastle for a demo which was important,one of us was arrested. If we had travelled by train it would have cost in excess of £250 and we would have had to leave early and abandon the arestee who would have been stranded until the next day. It cost £40 in petrol and we all got home safely. Total respect to activists who bike everywhere and we should aim for that but many activists at present are not up to it.
This reminds me of the debates in the animal rights movement wherein some argue that no REAL activist would ever use anything animal tested. The huge barrier to this is that EVERYTHING including water and essential oils is animal tested, furthermore our entire health care system is based on using things which are animal tested, someone who took this to the letter would have to have their own well, never eat anything that was not organic (pesticides are all animal tested), never use a printer, or read a magazine (inks were animal tested) etc etc. Pro vivisectionists have tried to guilt trip animal rights people into denying ANY medical treatment, it is akin to telling climate campaigners that they should never do anything which generates carbon, not even in an emergency. Things are not black and white here unless we live hermit like existances focusing on pure living we will be "hypocritical" or as I like to call it ,pragmatic. We are far more use in the real world as activists speaking to and networking with real people rather than being far removed, too good to be true and separate from society. How encouraging is it to the public to say "join us here's a list of all the things you are forbidden to do, yes I know your arm is hanging off but you cannot get into that evil ambulance"?
We should always aim to do the least damage by our actions whilst using common sense and it is all a bit of a balancing act.I am sure that the 2 people who went thought long and hard about going. Yes they generated carbon but so did I when I drove people back to Climate Camp at Kings North from the police station, they could have walked/ cycled the 5 miles or so at 02.00. We are soft we have been brought up to charmed lives, maybe we do need to harden ourselves up a bit but again how attractive is it to say "join us and if you get arrested, even if you are a frightened teenager, it's only 5 miles you can walk it"?
Two people going to another continent to network with other activists makes sense to me. Conference calls, etc work to an extent but are not the same as meeting face to face, indeed things may need to be said in private away from the watch of the FBI and other security forces. One person cannot bounce ideas off themselves, 3 is excessive, 2 just right. BAA and all the others network all the time, sometimes as someone really aptly put it earlier on this thread those who clear up the shit do get a bit dirty.
I once went sabbing on a mountain bike with just one other person in Cumbria and we were constantly mobbed but fortunately the hunt felt so sorry for us they did not attack us, we were effective but it is handy to have a landie. To go sabbing or to try and get a mobile demo going without mobiles would be very hard especially as there are now no phone boxes that work. Recently 4 of us had to get to Newcastle for a demo which was important,one of us was arrested. If we had travelled by train it would have cost in excess of £250 and we would have had to leave early and abandon the arestee who would have been stranded until the next day. It cost £40 in petrol and we all got home safely. Total respect to activists who bike everywhere and we should aim for that but many activists at present are not up to it.
This reminds me of the debates in the animal rights movement wherein some argue that no REAL activist would ever use anything animal tested. The huge barrier to this is that EVERYTHING including water and essential oils is animal tested, furthermore our entire health care system is based on using things which are animal tested, someone who took this to the letter would have to have their own well, never eat anything that was not organic (pesticides are all animal tested), never use a printer, or read a magazine (inks were animal tested) etc etc. Pro vivisectionists have tried to guilt trip animal rights people into denying ANY medical treatment, it is akin to telling climate campaigners that they should never do anything which generates carbon, not even in an emergency. Things are not black and white here unless we live hermit like existances focusing on pure living we will be "hypocritical" or as I like to call it ,pragmatic. We are far more use in the real world as activists speaking to and networking with real people rather than being far removed, too good to be true and separate from society. How encouraging is it to the public to say "join us here's a list of all the things you are forbidden to do, yes I know your arm is hanging off but you cannot get into that evil ambulance"?
We should always aim to do the least damage by our actions whilst using common sense and it is all a bit of a balancing act.I am sure that the 2 people who went thought long and hard about going. Yes they generated carbon but so did I when I drove people back to Climate Camp at Kings North from the police station, they could have walked/ cycled the 5 miles or so at 02.00. We are soft we have been brought up to charmed lives, maybe we do need to harden ourselves up a bit but again how attractive is it to say "join us and if you get arrested, even if you are a frightened teenager, it's only 5 miles you can walk it"?
Two people going to another continent to network with other activists makes sense to me. Conference calls, etc work to an extent but are not the same as meeting face to face, indeed things may need to be said in private away from the watch of the FBI and other security forces. One person cannot bounce ideas off themselves, 3 is excessive, 2 just right. BAA and all the others network all the time, sometimes as someone really aptly put it earlier on this thread those who clear up the shit do get a bit dirty.
Lynn Sawyer
Comments
Hide the following 84 comments
.
29.03.2010 13:44
But the wood for the boat would leave a footprint....
There comes a point when eco-ism is taken too far. Give people hassle for travelling by plane within the UK or the closer parts of mainland Europe. Giving people shit for trvaelling to a climate change confrence on a different continent by plane is ridiculous.
Should they wait till winter and cross the ice caps into Alaska instead?
hippies piss me off
so this is what our donations r being used 4
29.03.2010 13:53
the mind boggles
oh gosh
29.03.2010 14:21
there is absolutely no argument FOR this action.
sense
if there are problems with this conference
29.03.2010 14:33
If there are problems, its with the conference itself. Morales will gain political points as an alternative Copenhagen. "Enlightened" state gains eco points with radical movements and NGO's whilst Morales can stick two fingers up to "imperialist" states in the west. I'm confused about what is hoped to be achieved there.
Ben
Point is if people didn't fly there would be more ships and less frivolous trave
29.03.2010 14:36
Europe to South America by sea...
There are no regular passenger services from the UK or Europe to Central or South America. If you have the time and money, it's possible to cross the Atlantic from Southampton to New York with Cunard, catch an Amtrak train from New York to New Orleans then somewhere like El Paso, followed by buses down through Mexico. See the United States page for more information. Alternatively, some freight ships have a limited number of passenger places, and there may be the occasional cruise. For these, the best place to start your research is:
www.geocities.com/freighterman.geo.
www.freighterworld.com.
www.freighter-cruises.com.
UK agencies booking travel on cargo ships: www.strandtravel.co.uk, CruiseAZ , www.cruisepeople.co.uk.
anon
Homepage:
http://www.seat61.com/SouthAmerica.htm
classic diversion tactic from the Mail
29.03.2010 14:43
The bad done by these people travelling is potentially massively offset in the long run by building a international network. Sure they could do it by email but sometimes meeting face to face is more effective.
There is a saying: if you clear up shit, you will get your hands dirty.
The Mail is diverting attention from the massive environmental impact of air travel done for trivial or business reasons by criticising the tiny impact of two people doing it for the best of reasons.
Maybe they are toffs, I don't know, but the critics here are walking into a obvious trap set by the Daily Mail and falling for their bullshit hook, line and sinker.
What if they live in London and get the tube into town for a meeting? That is still damaging the environment. Even just by living we are damaging the environment. Are the Daily Mail suggesting the only ethical position is to kill yourself?!
anon
Blah blah
29.03.2010 15:01
Who would you trust a CC activist or the Mail? I think I know the answer.
Coregroup
Blah blah
29.03.2010 15:01
Who would you trust a CC activist or the Mail? I think I know the answer.
Coregroup
Blah blah
29.03.2010 15:02
Who would you trust a CC activist or the Mail? I think I know the answer.
Coregroup
democratic decision?
29.03.2010 15:06
For a media savvy group, making such an obvious media/PR blunder is very stupid.
I'd bet they didn't consult the media team!
climate camper
Lifestylism
29.03.2010 15:44
Give me a break!
How else are you supposed to get to S. America? A reinactment of the Kon Tiki expedition? Swim? Or travel by cargo ship (which is probably worse anyway).... bah - some people.
Krop
@ Coregroup and climate camper
29.03.2010 16:02
If you don't believe me look in the minutes - it's on page 3
Unhappy camper
Confirmation
29.03.2010 16:41
While I'm generally pretty opposed to climate camp (despite being involved) as activist stuntist nonsense that fails to understand what either (anti)capitalism or class struggle are all about, this could be a blessing in disguise. The Daily Mail reports that the flights are "being paid for by donations to Climate Camp from people opposed to flying and airport expansion.". This is certainly a lie. Many climate camp people, including me, may be opposed to airport expansion, but we are absolutely not opposed to airport expansion full stop - far from it. Equally, Camp for Climate Action as a whole has no position on people taking flights - I for one would block any attempt to try and institute a policy of no floghts. Middle class preachy nonsense. However, perhaps we (climate camp) can use this opportunity to highlight the fact that we are advocate system change, not lifestyle change. Working class people taking the occassional flight - either for activist reasons or to visit family / holiday, etc. - is fine and not the problem.
(A)
Think before you write
29.03.2010 16:51
Yes, this was decided at the Bristol CC meeting after lots of discussion. It was/is controversial, and I stood aside from the final decision due to some concerns (sadly enough in part because I thought it might give people like some of the posters above another ill informed stick with which to beat CC).
Anyway, there's a few arguements (with my quick answers) here:
1) To go is a 'PR' blunder that gives the press another hypocrisy stick to beat us with. Yes, quite possibly. However, if we think it's important, do we not go for fear of offending someone/the media? Well, fuck that I think. The real issue is if it's worthwhile to go, so...
2) Is it going to be a useful thing to attend for radical anti-climate change/anti-capitalist politics in the UK? Well, guess what... we don't know yet as it hasn't happened. Lots of concerns were raised in Bristol about the organisers/state and government roles/greenwash etc., but in the end quite a few people felt like it was important to have a UK CC prescence at an 'International grassroots anti-capitalist' climate change conference. Yes, it might turn out to be another NGO dominated scam, but it might also be (or even as well as) an important event involving lots of radical people that we otherwise have little contact with.
3) The carbon emmisions of the flights taken by the people attending. Well, I have no time for this arguement. Liberal individual guilt tripping rubbish and it has nothing in common with radical anti-capitalist politics, only wet green NGO crap.
Anyway, I'm gonna give up here...
There are all sorts of things to talk and work out (and if any of you went to the CC Gathering you'd have heard some intelligent and useful discussions on those topics), like the fact that people will go, do you have the richest/most free time on their hands go and represent CC, or do you try and work out who would be best to go and pay for them?
Yes, it's all complicated and difficult, but it's called struggle FFS. The only easy option is to sit in your house/yurt/hole in the ground, tend your allotment and bathing in your oh-so-righteous eco-angel glow while you slag off people trying to move a potentially epoch shaping struggle forward.
Aye despair
No Fly Zone
29.03.2010 16:59
Ben
What Has Happened to the Environmental Movement?
29.03.2010 17:03
There are a lot of people with many similar complaints about the way that they have been used and abused by the middle class liberal reformists who have effectively hijacked the climate camp.
There is now a hierarchy of green capitalists in control who appear to be working with the government and the NGOs to implement carbon trading and to enforce austerity measures on the working class population.
When we first stepped up the campaign against capitalism after the 1990s roads protests we had no idea that our work would be taken over and used against us in this manner.
Hopefully more people will be prepared to come forward and reveal what has really happened to the environmental movement which we put so much of our time and effort into, and which now appears to have been hijacked and killed off by the corporations and the governments that we were fighting against.
Time for the Truth
brings up questions
29.03.2010 17:11
Because i've been bullied by all this "planes are evil" stuff eg from Plane Stupid.
And now........ people are saying its ok to fly!?
This reminds me of the chips are good for you / chips are bad for you bollox.
Furthermore, if a protest is occurring to stop planes fly, who is in the right?
mary
Why send two?
29.03.2010 17:24
The simple fact is that if you believe passionately in climate change you don’t fly.
Anon
Plane Stupid’s justification
29.03.2010 17:31
The reality is that some climate change activists believe that flying should be confined to them – and that us plebs, who want a cheap flight to Spain for our summer hols, should be prevented from getting them.
This decision is total and unjustifiable hypocrisy and is about as mad as the ALF announcing that it was going to start experimenting on animals as a means of ending vivisection.
Tony Potts
Please please please don’t go
29.03.2010 17:35
JJ
an outrage
29.03.2010 17:38
The amazing thing, and this is really amazing is that over 90% of the room thought it is a good idea.
Putting aside thoughts of whether it was a good idea or not, it is absolutely staggering that so many people were so dumb as to not twig of the potential PR fallout.
I mean really, if they are intelligent enough or have enough smarts to realise this, then their whole competence in being able to do anything should be called into question.
This must rank in the same league as the parlimentary expenses scandal.
tobbler
bolivia
29.03.2010 18:31
coregroup
Leaflets on non recycled paper too....
29.03.2010 19:18
Sort it out Climate Camp!
anon
hmmm...
29.03.2010 19:56
Anway,all those people who are commenting on the hypocrisy of flying should immediatley stop using the internet: Check the co2 emissions from internet servers. I guess if you are a primtivist, living off grid, self-suffcient you may have a point: otherwise shut-up and buy some light bulbs.
non-flyer
Jesus fucking christ...
29.03.2010 20:28
To make it clear... flying on holiday/to a radical conference is NOT the issue; even if some of the more liberal elements of the climate movement like Plane Stupid say it is.
If you think it is you're the enemy too - part of a NGO, liberal green elite more concerned with guilt tripping normal people to not fly on holiday, rather than fighting the real cause of climate change: capitalism, class society and the ecologically destructive and patriarchal civilisation ravaging the earth and it's inhabitants.
Nonny Mouse
octavius
29.03.2010 21:16
octavius
shock news
29.03.2010 21:24
Can’t help but feel that a certain amount of perspective is missing. Whilst there are aspects of the conference to be concerned about the mode of transport to get their probably doesn’t need to be so high up the agenda.
* * *
Resonance
Homepage:
http://res0nance.wordpress.com/
Donations Should Be Taken Directly to Protest Sites
29.03.2010 22:11
Without naming anyone in particular we simply put out the message that donations should be given directly to the genuine protesters who were living and working on the protest sites.
Once again the working class eco-warriors are being exploited by cynical opportunists who are taking advantage of the full time activists who are actually on the front lines of the battle against climate change.
We never see any of these part time publicity seekers on the protest sites and they do not represent us or what we believe in or what we are doing, and we would prefer that they stop claiming that they do.
As far as we are concerned they are trying to take the credit for our genuine commitment to the environmental cause and they are cheating people out of money that should rightly be coming to the protest sites.
Time for the Truth
So is "Plane Stupid" wrong?
30.03.2010 00:07
anon
Do as we say, not as we do.
30.03.2010 00:25
If the two activists are successful in their mission, to form international co-operation, there will hopefully be a return visit?
And many more return visits for years to come?
With a population of 6,000,000,000 lets be thankful that it's only the posh twats form the successful capitalist military powers who will ever be able to jet around the world on such important business as "defeating capitalism" and stopping other people from jetting around the world.
I'm more worth that you 'cus I'm savings the planet
Climate Camp Should Explain What is Going On
30.03.2010 01:24
The fact that the Camp for Climate Action is spending thousands of pounds of other peoples' money sending representatives by plane to Bolivia may not have anything to do with Plane Stupid who have been quite right to campaign against flying.
The liberal reformists who have taken over the climate camp are shadowy characters who have more to do with political parties and commercial institutions and government agencies than middle class students.
Maybe the Camp for Climate Action should issue a statement on behalf of the people they are claiming to represent so that everyone can understand what is happening.
We obviously didn't risk life and limb at the Heathrow climate camp to help finance expensive flights to political climate conferences in far off countries.
A lot of anti-capitalist environmental activists would like to see the Camp for Climate Action disbanded because it no longer has anything to do with what it was supposed to be all about when we first started it, and it does seem likely that most of us have now returned to our grassroots origins.
The unfortunate reality is that the climate camp has been so thoroughly infiltrated by undesirable elements that it is compromised beyond any real hope of redemption.
The fight is not against Plane Stupid but against undercover police and government spies and all the liberal green capitalists and politicians who have jumped on board the environmental bandwagon and are trying to milk it for all it is worth.
The danger is in allowing the corporations and the governments to carry on with their plans for carbon trading and green taxes and destroying the biosphere to produce biofuels which can only end with the extinction of humanity.
Green capitalism is all about producing and selling more consumer products and not about cutting carbon emissions and reducing the earth's temperatures or stopping the melting of the polar ice caps or slowing down the rising sea levels.
If we really want to save the human race from being driven to extinction by the burning of fossil fuels we have to fundamentally repair the damage and regenerate the environment and completely stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
Full stop.
It will also be necessary to work out answers to the problems of how to rescue the three or four billion people who will be displaced from their homes by the worldwide flooding which is coming soon, and how to deal with the new ice age when the Gulf Stream stops completely.
There is no simple solution to global warming and climate change and so far all that has been offered by the politicians are ideas for making the bankers and the transnational corporations a lot more money at the expense of the working people and the future generations who will never be born the way things are going.
Time for the Truth
Some sense
30.03.2010 09:02
"To make it clear... flying on holiday/to a radical conference is NOT the issue. If you think it is you're the enemy too - part of a NGO, liberal green elite more concerned with guilt tripping normal people to not fly on holiday, rather than fighting the real cause of climate change: capitalism, class society and the ecologically destructive and patriarchal civilisation ravaging the earth and it's inhabitants."
I wish we had this as a litmus test for people participating in the CfCA! To an extent, the CfCA has bred this ascetic position over the past five years, giving birth to all these 'little hitlers' crying 'hypocrite!' because a handful of people just may think it's a good idea to network and learn from social movements that overthrew successive governments in 2003 and 2005.
In the middle of the night in 2003 thousands of Bolivians blockaded a highway to their capital city by dragging a train car several km down a track and tipping it - by hand - off a bridge. They lay siege to the city in protests at gas privatization. Meanwhile in the UK, a bunch of people discussed how to grow parsley out of their arse, demonstrated how to make a house out of only two tyres, and reflected on the revolutionary merits of getting a scabby sandwich out of a bin.
I can only welcome all the people decrying the CfCA for sending people to the conference. Hopefully it can lead to the CfCA finally throwing off the shackles of crap asceticism and take a firmly radical anti- & post- capitalist stance. Good riddance ye naysayers! Welcome back anti-capitalism!
Freshair
I will fly
30.03.2010 10:53
A. nony. mouse
sense
30.03.2010 11:00
Bakunin
Not about lifestyle
30.03.2010 12:00
Somebody
Bakunin back from the dead?!
30.03.2010 12:09
I'm dissapointed that 145 years of being 6 feet under has led him to betray his political positions so blatantly, reducing his collectivist position to one of liberal individualist lifestylism.
Shame on you Bakunin - you once profound anarchist! Back to your coffin, naughty Bakunin!
The messiah!
somebody
30.03.2010 12:19
bakunin
Pot, Kettle, Black
30.03.2010 12:20
And your average person hates to be told "do not fly, you are not allowed"
Or, you must recycle, or not eat meat, or you can't drive from A-B etc
And, when these people kick up a fuss, they are told they are Evil and Wicked.
So, its very, very interesting to see the reaction of various pro-climate individuals when they are told that their flight is inappropriate, that they cannot fly. Reminds me of the pigs in Animal Farm. "We'll special, we need to eat the apples."
ted herath
quote from last comment
30.03.2010 12:33
Assuming this is true, and it wasn't hidden behind the usual fortress of passwords & userids or tucked away in the backwoods corner of the site, how exactly does something being on the CfCA website comprise availability for "all" to discuss as you claim?
How does someone without internet access contribute to the discussion?
Or how does who does potentially have internet access but doesn't wish to contribute through such a platform do so?
Do you think it is acceptable that someone has to buy a natural resource hungry, envrionmentally damaging computer (run by electricity and contributing to CO2 emmisions) and pay to take out a broadband subscription in order to have the 'privelage' and the right to contribute to that debate? Do you think it is acceptable that a protestor occupying a threatened wood, and taking real action at the grassroots to take action on climate change, has to travel 30 miles to their nearest library to contribute to this debate?
Do you think this form of digital and class apartheid should be an acceptable part of the Climate Camp formula?
What publicity efforts have you put in to disseminating the existance of climate camp website and the existence of that specific debate?
The plain fact is the Camp for Climate Action UK, is the British Camp for Climate Action, and not the Bolivian Camp for Climate Action. There is nothing that CCA cannot learn or find out about the climate or the envrionment by being physically in Boliva, that they can not find out from people in this country, or by contacting people in Bolivia through means which have less envrionmental impact and less cost.
Let's face it and own up, this was a jolly for the Jemima's, Rupert's and Tamsins of Climate Camp, paid for at he expense of the Climate Cap coffers, and those they see as 'the little people', and at the expense of the reputation and environmental ethics and social responsibilty of climate camp itself.
The sooner the self-appointed, opportunistic and vain glorious leaders of this group resign or are forced out, to allow the real voice of the people to manage things the better.
Rick
...
30.03.2010 12:44
Proposals were also discussed in person at regional and national climate camp gatherings. I assume some neighbourhoods discussed them at that level too.
The last national gathering decided the criteria for how people would choose who went to Bolivia.
As far as i'm aware Tamsin has no involvement with CfCA any more, and even Plane Stupid have got rid of her.
CfCA may not be explicitly anti-capitalist at present, but it clearly contains many anti-capitalists active within it.
Somebody else
hypocrites
30.03.2010 13:01
boris
Erm.
30.03.2010 13:18
Factoid
Camp for Climate Action IS anti-capitalist
30.03.2010 13:29
Our politics may be becoming watered down but we are anti-capitalist group.
Unhappy camper
Anti-Capitalist Climate Camp
30.03.2010 13:39
Another Camper
Please don't go...
30.03.2010 13:45
1. Flying is bad
We cannot dispute this. Not only does each flight pump vast amount of carbon into the air but it does it in a far more damaging way than most – if not all – forms of transport.
Therefore in deciding to get the CfCA to fly them to the conference Ben and Agi are directly contributing to climate change.
2. They do not need to be at the conference
Plane Stupid has, to its credit, argued that most business flights are unnecessary because of video/internet links. Participating in this conference could still easily be achieved.
3. It is a very bad example
If these flights can be justified (and I think Ben has more jet-setting adventures planned) then so can virtually every other flight.
4. It completely discredits the movement
This is now an issue for the mainstream media. The Mail on Sunday considered it important enough (ie sufficiently damaging) to run and this alone shows how much damage it will cause.
OK – so they feel very honoured to be selected to go and for all of the other delegates to show them massive respect because they have come from England to tell the rest of the world how to campaign against climate change. But in doing so they are causing unforeseen damage to the cause that they profess to believe. They should not go.
Steve
The usual story
30.03.2010 13:48
The sooner the workers and the genuine envrionmental activists take back the reins of control of Climate Camp the better. They can only take over if the genuine climate campers, the work horses, the dedicated, honest and working class lads and lassios that have been there since day one, before the toff coup d'tat, passively let them.
Introduce tickets and means testing, with free access for the low-paid, working families, the unemployed and the most hard up, and massive fees for the toffs. That'll quickly get rid of them. Free-loading toffs always disappear once the begging bowl goes around.
Let the toffs buzz off and go and dig their own compost toilets.
Wizzy
Irrespective of the politics, oil will run out and flights do pollute
30.03.2010 13:57
First let me say I have never travelled by plane but I'm not involved with Climate Action at all, and I'm not a toff. But I don't think it's a big deal if two people go to a conference to help build an international movement.
However, some people here seem to have a head-in-the-sand view that anyone being again air travel is wrong and anti working class. I'm not sure if they are just trolls from the libertarian right, possibly not, it's difficult to tell on Indymedia.
Some people like (A) have said things like "Working class people taking the occasional flight - either for activist reasons or to visit family / holiday, etc. - is fine and not the problem."
Well, it would be nice if that were the case, but if every one of the world's 6 billion population took a flight or two a year the oil will pretty soon run out, not to mention the CO2 emissions and pollution. What they really mean is "if myself and people like me from the relatively privileged (in global terms) working class fly, then it is OK".
This is a fundamental fact, and no amount of political waffle will get round it. I'd love it if the world could sustain flights for all, zero pollution flights and free ponies for everyone. But that ain't going to happen, so deal with it.
Whether we ration flights just for the rich, or rely on lifestylers selflessly giving up their flights for others, or deal with it in some more equitable way is another matter, but you can't argue with the basic science.
anon
Beneficial?
30.03.2010 14:59
They really don’t get the bigger picture do they!
There is an intense unease within the movement about this jaunt – not just because many people feel it’s wrong but because they know that the story will be used against us again and again.
ANON
right....
30.03.2010 15:36
campanologist
democracy requires active participation
30.03.2010 15:57
These people thought that they could simply start a 'movement' and walk away, leaving the 'movement' to run it's self, and stay on topic, while they go away and start something else.
It's not the people who start things, but the people who stay and carry things on who are important.
If you are not happy with this newfound acceptance of the growing airline industry, turn up at the next national gathering on the 17 - 18 April and have your say.
Reclaim Camp for Climate Action for the environmental.
anon
pissing on each others' houses
30.03.2010 16:39
Seeing it all, and the climate camp in general, as an upper class thing in general, is doing a big disservice to anyone involved in it who is from a different class, is self-aware about privilege and social justice, or is involved in it to try and make it the way we all want it to be.
After all, it is an open process, even if it doesn't always work brilliantly, is limited or mistakes are made - to see shadowy elites is daft and self-fulfiling. All parts of the 'climate movement' (if such exists) are not the same (grassroots, World Development Movement etc, Plane Stupid), but if you tar us all with the same brush you are surely helping doom 100s of thousands to a painful death!
As to whether it's OK it's OK for anyone to be flying, or if it could have been done another way, or the class analysis of this. Bullshit! I agree with anon ('Irrespective of the politics...') that it's not about lifestylism, liberal nonsense (and then labelling that shallow analysis - how patronising is that!) or class oppression. The people who say you middle class twats are trying to deny me (or others of) the working class oppressed my one holiday a year is just self-justifying their own behaviour, and hasn't lived or worked on poor estates where people don't get to fly even once a year, and often don't aspire to either. Or bullshit ultimatums - sort your politics out or I'm flying - geez, where's that school playground?! I'm not saying that there doesn't need to be a bit more self-awareness and analysis of class & privilege, or that some people haven't used it as a stepping stone to an NGO career, but remember how young and inexperienced many people are who've got involved in the Camp for Climate Action over the last couple of years.
It's the marginalised and/or oppressed of this world whether here or abroad that are worst hit by the impacts of climate chaos. I don't think we should be moralistic, preachy (or even absolutist/holier than thou), but I do believe we have responsibility for the choices we make and their impact on people worse off in other parts of the world - they are already dying or being dispossessed through human-caused climate chaos. That said, here here (or is it hear hear?) to the words of Lynn Sawyer.
Note also that the CfCA gathering decided to fund 2 global South activists to go too, and put various conditions on 2 people from here being funded.
I'm not sure how useful the conference will be, and whether it's OK to be condoning a state-sponsored event (Climate Justice Action decided not), and maybe it comes partly from our feeling like we're more important than we are, but we don't know till we go - maybe it is an important point in a global climate justice movement, and the personal face-to-face links are not replicable through the internet. The people who made this decision in the way they did did so for reasons of awareness of privilege and social justice, and after much discussion, so (read the minutes properly before spouting off &) give people a break/go grind your axe on your own chips/pet gripes!
I agree with Aye despair that it may be a PR blunder, but that's certainly not a reason not to do something in itself. Maybe thinking it wouldn't be picked up on was an error, and instead a pro-active press release could have been issued...but maybe that would have been a greater risk, and maybe we shouldn't worry too much. It's like people shouting 'get a job' or 'soap-dodger' when you're protesting!
To say the environmental movement has been hijacked and co-opted is a bit fatalistic.
And to say in the 90s there were middle class (& therefore disgusting and oppressive!) people creaming off money from (the heroic) protest camps is just not true. Of course donations should go to protest camps, and we should continue to support them as it's not an easy lifestyle, but there is essential support stuff that can be done for protest camps that you just can't do easily enough from up a tree.
There've always been issues with NGOs and careerists, compared to grassroots campaigning and empowering local communities. There've always been issues of a huge diversity of people campaigning for all sorts of reasons, and wanting to see something very different come out at the end. That's OK, relax, it's nothing new, just be vigilant and help strive for it to be better.
Whether the Camp for Climate Action is anti-capitalist (a spectrum line does not a decision make) or has passed it's sell-by date are other questions; I for one too have returned to my grassroots campaigning. What is certain is that there's still a lot of a younger generation who've got into politics through the camps, and who are still excited or committed to the CfCA thing, and who we should continue to have contact with, to continue to learn from each other and inspire ourselves to more audacious direct action.
And cheers to less parsley arse-growing (or should that be arse parsley-growing)!
another pisser
flying to an action/meeting
30.03.2010 17:31
however, those more than several non urgent flghts i have taken. no problems whatsoever.
so my advise is this. if it is for an action or a meeting don´t do it. boats and trains are best. thereby storing aside a bit a carbonic kharma for holiday flights etc..
though seriously, if an invitation had been extended from the americas, presumably the hosts would know the score and wouldn´t have a problem as some do.
hysterical childen........ SHUT UP!!!
blubber booh
a golden opportunity lost
30.03.2010 19:23
Such an opportunity to demonstrate how business trips like this can be avoided in todays digital age. Perhaps such a real life example would have assisted businesses in reducing their carbon usage as well as amount to large savings? A true example of what a little foresight and innovation can achieve when thinking-out-of-the-box and putting a priority on reducing carbon usage.
Maybe the prudent investment of 2 x £1200 + accom + expenses in such technology would yeilded more far reaching results and PUBLICITY. And maybe the benefits of such an investment could have been used over and over again.
Oh well - maybe i'm just trying to go against the traditional method of business of flying everywhere?
simon
well done campanologist
30.03.2010 19:27
"I for one do not equate the good work Ben and Agi will be doing in Bolivia with the mindless migration to the costas every summer by people who would know how to spell environmentalist let alone be one. Lets face it, the campaigners do enough work and deserve to be rewarded with the flights - at least they care".
you win the prize for the most idiotic and offensive comment on this whole long list of comments (54 so far). you also enter the prize draw for being in the top ten ignorant and offensive comments of all time on indymedia.
many of the people who go on cheap package holiday to "the costas" do so because they are workers on low wages with families to support. for example the folk who collect your rubbish (for recycling as well as landfill), the nurses who tend you when you are sick, and the cleaners who cleaned up your crap at university and now at your place of work.
they may well care very much about the environment, but they probably tell themselves that their family needs that holiday for the sake of sanity. or that considering they are so poor and consume relatively little in comparison to their middle-class or upper-class bosses, one short (ie within europe) flight per year is insignificant.
they will find a justification because it allows them to do what they feel they need to do.
much as these climate camp polluters are doing.
are the nurses and refuse collectors (who may well also be activists in what little spare time they have) really less deserving of a short flight than the climate camp reps are of a long long flight?
amazed
Handed to them on a plate
30.03.2010 19:42
"Hey guys, this is a great opportunity for us to demostrate that many business flights are unnecessary. Let's show the world how things can change!"
I've done plenty of online conference stuff and been in quite a few online seminars of Adobe's.
All without leaving my desk. The real amazing thing is - I don't even think man-made climate change exists!
Moxxie
The Liberal Reformists Are Not Anti-Capitalists
30.03.2010 20:26
It is no secret that the government has co-opted some of the climate campers.
Both the BBC and Channel Four referred to the “key organisers” of the “Wave” march who were entertained at Number Ten by the prime minister who praised them publicly on television and said “the protesters are right to be angry about climate change”.
These same climate campers were also sitting alongside Mr Brown when he announced the beginning of the government's election campaign to the mainstream news media which referred to them as “green campaigners” who were helping Labour with their environmental agenda.
They were not named by the newspapers and the television but we all know who they are – we meet them at the climate camps and at the meetings and at the marches and demonstrations which they organise.
The liberal reformists believe in compromising and negotiating and working with the corporations and the governments and they do not share the same ideals as the anti-capitalist activists who started the climate camp in the first place.
Green capitalism is not the answer to global warming and climate change and to point this out is not to “help doom 100s of thousands of people to a painful death” as Another Pisser says, but hopefully to start the process of finding real solutions.
Another Pisser is quite right to say it is not true that there were middle class people creaming off money from the protest camps in the 1990s.
What I wrote was: “During the road protests in the 1990s we had similar problems with middle class people soliciting money for protests they had nothing whatever to do with”.
There were people claiming to be “in charge” of the protests and they were asking for donations from the public, which was embarrassing because we are not beggars and we did not ask anyone to beg for money on our behalf.
We lived on the protest sites which meant they were our homes and we did not appreciate people coming from their own homes in Babylon and preaching to us and trying to order us around pretending they were our bosses.
We don't need anyone telling us that our lifestyle is not easy or that we need them doing “essential support stuff” for us.
Nor do we appreciate being patronised and compared with monkeys living up in the trees who need the Lords and Ladies Bountiful of the Camp for Climate Action to come and look after us.
When it all comes on top and the bulldozers are coming or the police and the bailiffs are trying to evict us we don't see any of these so-called self appointed benefactors for dust.
We don't see them on the protest sites anyway so why are they soliciting money from the gullible public who seem to think they are contributing to the protests?
Why does the climate camp keep asking us for money as well?
The fact is that we have been giving them money but this is not likely to continue for much longer now that we know what they are doing with it.
Anon is quite right to say that most of the people who started the Camp for Climate Action are no longer actively involved in the decision making process.
But he is completely mistaken to say that we thought that we could simply start a 'movement' while we went away to start something else.
The fact is that we haven't gone away.
We are still here and we are still doing what we have always done, and most of us do not have time to attend political meetings because there is far more important work to be done than sitting around talking all the time.
Time for the Truth
seems the way
30.03.2010 22:58
wow
Jon's right
30.03.2010 23:58
I think it’s slightly arrogant to believe that the input from the Climate Camp is going to make any difference to the outcome and that this input is going to be any more effect if it is done in person rather than indirectly or via an Internet link.
I remember when anti-Heathrow campaign John Stewart was caught out taking a short-haul flight to attend an anti-airport meeting in Italy he admitted that he had made a mistake and said that he would not do so again. He now travels to meetings in Europe by train.
Angie B
crap
31.03.2010 02:34
Why shouldn't us poor people occassionally enjoy the benefits of air travel?
jo blogs
@ Time for the truth
31.03.2010 08:03
Unhappy Camper
@ Another camper
31.03.2010 08:07
Unhappy Camper
Unacceptable
31.03.2010 09:03
Angry person
The carbon footprint of the internet bigger than that of the aviation industry
31.03.2010 09:48
Sure, everyone needs to think about their personal consumption in relation to climate change. But recognising something needs to happen on the issue doesn't mean that individuals and movements should paralise themselves by striving towards their own carbon neutrality over and above everything else.
Obviously, the total number of flights need to be reduced. But aviation is only one problematic industry. The carbon footprint of the internet is bigger than that of the aviation industry, for example (see:
anon
amazed
31.03.2010 10:08
campanologist
Unacceptable
31.03.2010 10:12
I was convinced that the CfCA had lost the plot a little while ago when I heard it had discovered a private security company had a number of spies in it's ranks but did nothing to expose them. This latest farce has just confirmed my worst fears.
Anon
Climate Camp Climate Criminals
31.03.2010 10:50
Government people fly all over claiming to be doing good.
THERE BOMBING AFGANISTAN CLAIMING TO BE DOING GOOD.
Climate Campers committed CRIMINAL OFFENCES to stop airport expansion, and now climate camp is PUBLICLY helping to support airport expansion, by showing how FLYING is ESSENTIAL for "ACTIVISM".
And it's ok to say that you are anti capitalist, but what the fuck dose capitalism mean anyway. It means different things to different people, so don't ues it !
why didn't someone at the bristol meeting block it? The fact that no one blocked the 'in principal' decision, and left booking the tickets up to the Climate Camp leaders shows what climate camp has become.
Too much money for it's own good.
angry ex camper
nuff said
31.03.2010 11:16
--
Am I really reading this?
31.03.2010 12:01
You've firmly entered the world of the post-modern my friend! Which I'm not sure you should be doing, as your thought processes are completely fucked. You are equating the 'value' of building a social movement to bombing Afghanistan? Seriously?
"Climate Campers committed CRIMINAL OFFENCES to stop airport expansion"
Yep. But airport expansion isn't happening because two people are attending a conference in Bolivia - or because people want to go Majorca. It's happening because of social relations of capital. Those 'expanding' airports are merely functionaries through which the law of value is articulated.
"What the fuck dose capitalism mean anyway. It means different things to different people, so don't use it!"
This is pretty much in tune with the rest of your ignorance. No wonder you don't understand why these people are flying to Bolivia! If you want a reading list I can provide you with one - but no doubt that will make me a 'useless academic' who is 'fucking the working klass' or an equal amount of bullshit.
"why didn't someone at the bristol meeting block it?"
Because not everyone is a fucking idiot. Go back to your dumpster.
Sigh
re Sigh's comments
31.03.2010 13:08
That's a bit elitist. I wonder who else you look down upon in the same manner - tree protesters; squatters; road swampies; workers sit-in activists etc?
Are we all just a bunch of crusties to you or something, refusing to kow-tow to the green capitalist neo-liberal hegemony of 2.2 kids, a house in the suburbs and an eco car in the driveway?
Paulie
sigh
31.03.2010 13:13
non-hypocrite
Of course they should go!!!
31.03.2010 13:41
It is also important to remember that they are not the only UK grassroots activists who are going to be there. I know of at least two more and someone from process told me that she thought at least seven were going. Then there are campaigners from the mainstream orgaisations.
At one stage, I counted three police and two air ambulance helicopters during the Ratcliffe action and they will have used far more fuel than two people will on their trip to Bolivia. Does this mean that we should no longer organise actons in case the police use their helicopter. Of course not.
OK so Ben and Agnes may not be working class northerners but that doesn’t mean that they have nothing to say. Both are eloquent and intelligent and will not only make a valuable contribution to an important conference but will make us proud to be involved in the CfCA.
Ruth
flying
31.03.2010 13:54
their case against flying always had a strong patronising and snobbish anti-working class part to it. it surely this continues if some here say it's ok to fly to bolivia but not to mallorca. who are you to say where I can spend my holidays and where is the scale that you use to measure the worthyness of flights you take?
easyjet
grrr
31.03.2010 13:55
I don't think the comment re dumpsters was being elitest, but anti-lifestylist!
Another person
Round and round and round
31.03.2010 14:11
Dont Feed The Trolls
No one said that they shouldn't go,
31.03.2010 14:16
FLYING IS NOT THE ONLY WAY to go to south america. It is posible to go by sea and land.
But not practical ?
Not expanding airports is possible,
but not practical !
Not expanding coal fired power stations is possible,
but not practical !
Not expanding the economy is possible,
but not practical !
Cutting carbon emissions is possible,
but not practical !
And that is not a matter of absolute CO2 emissions from two air liner seats it is only as a matter of principal, because Climate Camp used to make principled stands.
CC now seams to be concentrating all it's efforts on its vision of a FANTASY UTOPIAN WORLD rather than radical (meaning grass roots or down to earth) practical campaigning.
The impractical is possible !
Impotrant issue
31.03.2010 14:54
Concerned activist
INDY-MI5?
31.03.2010 15:10
So much for being anonymous!
And who vets them or stops the state monitoring the IP addresses too?
Anon
80% of these comments are by aviation industry trolls
31.03.2010 15:14
greentea
The Hypocricy of it all
31.03.2010 15:27
Sam
just a question....
31.03.2010 15:33
if activists from social movements in places like europe are to be publicly flogged, hung, drawn and quartered for attending a meeting of social movements (with trepidation) in latin america - and flying there to do so (to spend less time and resources that people seem overly concerned about) - will the same go for the international solidarity meetings/talks/events many of us attend in the uk in which comrades from other continents attend?....
... so the tar sands lot - fuck em eh - or at least chuck a few custard pies in their direction for flying here to talk to us about one of the most destructice projects on the planet?
... and those indigenous folk we so like to fetishise and romanticise about - fuck em - if they can't afford the extra time and money to get on a boat to come and talk to us, network and generate international solidarity - they can just fucking stay on their reserves and drop us the odd email if they're lucky enough to have broadband in their neck of the woods...?
... and palestinians heading over to the uk to talk and meet with solidarity activists - fuck em - don't they know the climate is more important than the occupation?
ah yeah - but that cool hip-hop/punk/rock/hardcore band that's flying in from the states to do a tour of social centres and squats - wicked... see you in the mosh pit?
seriously - not all climate campers of middle class (so fuck you), not all climate activists are hooray henry's (so fuck you), NOT ONE OF US IS POLITICALLY PURE (whatever political flavour you are - and thanks to Lyn Sawyer for a pretty useful comment some way above all of this shit) - so fuck you....
so much attention is put on the ticking clock of climate annihilation that we forget that the world has been in a state of emergency since the beginnings of imperialist conquest and capitalist relations... internet/telephone/letter are the least secure ways of movements communicating with each other....
i'm an anti-capitalist much more than i have ever been an environmentalist - why? cos environmental politics always seemed the space for white, middle class folk to finally feel at risk.... people like me have been on the receiving end of the state of emergency since we were born - for this reason i'm a pragmatist... if CfCA or any other group had been mobilising for us ALL to go to the conference - too right, that would have been fucked up and rubbish.... BUT by sending a couple of people to meet face-to-face like, wicked.... they'll be working hard on their return, and if we've got over ourselves by then, i reckon they might have some words and thoughts we wanna hear - cos the fact is that they are not going to "talk"/"present" or be the "big up" - they are going to listen and figure out just how us privileged europeans build resistance with those from southern states....
a bunch of mostly white folk arguing with themselves on indymedia is just a little bit irrelevant, don't you think? and winding up the daily hate mail is what we do, innit.... any idea that we need to think about PR, in relation to the daily hate mail.... well, we're a bit fucked if that's our biggest tool for bringing about major structural change across the world....
it's fine to outlaw flying.... but what happens when we realise we're on a sinking ship with a bunch of self-appointed "activist judges and jury's".... hand me a life jacket....
tuppence worth
Don't blame indymedia
31.03.2010 15:38
Lucy
Word!
31.03.2010 15:48
And as to Indymedia and trolls/thick activists and their stuff comments. Time has come for a total revamp of this site. It is increasingly becoming useless and full of trash. Can we have ameeting at the @ Bookfair please?
Nottingham Anti-Capitalist Climate activist thingy...
re don't feed the trolls
31.03.2010 16:14
It's funny how when someone wants to discredit the objections and concerns of dozens of contributors, they always trawl out the name-calling and that tired old "it's just a troll" conspiracy theory. Anything to head off dissent, encourage blind conformity, avoid dealing with or debating the issues, and deflect others from doing so.
So anyone who doesn't agree that Camp for Climate Action shouldn't be sending people on a gas guzzling trip to Bolivia, a trip costing more than the average Bolivian earns in a year, is a troll? A thread of 80 comments all from the same person?
What absolute, stark-raving nonsense.
Camp for Climate Action should be aiming to have a zero carbon footprint both during and between camps. I think people here are all able enough to understand that there is a major problem with the Camp sending people on a needless carbon footprint blow-out to Bolivia on a jet.
Anon
Ending the flame 'war'
31.03.2010 17:38
No, not just 'a troll', a deliberate orchestrated disinformation campaign. Whether it's a conspiracy involving many parties or just one malicious individual working on their own, that's a different mater. You can try to discredit the claim by calling it a conspiracy theory but it remains a provable fact, you just need access to IP logs.
Anon said, "Anything to head off dissent, encourage blind conformity, avoid dealing with or debating the issues, and deflect others from doing so."
No, it's not about heading off dissent or avoiding dealing with issues. Getting over a hundred people in a room to encourage debate and address dissent, that's a good way of dealing with things. Having an anonymous slanging match in the comments of Indymedia, that's a really sucky way which only benefits those who want to keep people divided and ineffectual.
Anon said, "So anyone who doesn't agree that Camp for Climate Action shouldn't be sending people on a gas guzzling trip to Bolivia, a trip costing more than the average Bolivian earns in a year, is a troll?"
No, there were around eight people who didn't endorse the decision at the national gathering and they were not trolls. There were another 150 or so who after long discussion over two sessions decided that on balance it was better to send people than not to. No doubt there are some people who posted here who disagree and are not trolls but that doesn't change the fact that this thread is unusually long and inflammatory because it is being manipulated by one individual pretending to be many.
Anon said, "Camp for Climate Action should be aiming to have a zero carbon footprint both during and between camps."
Really? Well in that case they may as well give up and shut down down. There is no way that could be done, apart from indulging in off-setting. Do you think it would have been possible to get 400 people to Copenhagen without emissions? Or 800 people to Ratcliffe-on-soar? Or transport marquees from around the country for camps at Blackheath, Kingsnorth, Heathrow or Draw without emitting any CO2? Of course not!
If you want to indulge in off-setting, try this. The 8 tonnes of CO2 emitted sending these two people on their 20,000 miles round trip can be off-set by just on of them being vegan for two years, or one of them forgoing use of their car for two years, or four in the case of an SUV. Considering how many climate campers are veggie or vegan and don't own a car, I think the off-set has already happened many times over.
There are of course other kinds of off-set, like the emissions saved when climate campers occupied Didcot power station last year and caused it to switch from coal to gas for the best part of a day. The reduction in emissions there would be many many times greater than the 8 tonnes emitted on this flight.
But of course off-sets are nonsense, just a way of justifying continued emissions and there is no need to resort to such false solutions to justify this trip. Everyone involved in climate camp could give up flying for life, go vegan until their draw their last breath, cycle until their legs give out, and eat nothing but skipped, local, organic potatoes until their last teeth have fallen from their gums - and despite all the emissions saved it would not make a dent in global emissions. And what if they persuaded everyone in this country to fo the same? Again it would not result in the necessary reductions in global emissions required if we are to curb global warming and avoid passing tipping points into cataclysmic climate chaos.
The only way which climate change can be adequately addressed is globally and that means some level of international organising. We've seen world leaders supposedly attempt it, without any meaningful results and now there are increasing attempts to move forward with grassroots initiatives from social movements around the world. Helping to strengthen these initiatives, acting in solidarity, co-operation and mutual aid, this offers perhaps some hope for tackling climate change. Arguing about 8 tonnes of CO2 will not.
Anon said, "I think people here are all able enough to understand that there is a major problem with the Camp sending people on a needless carbon footprint blow-out to Bolivia on a jet."
I hope that people here are able to think for themselves so I won't try to speak for them.
I think that climate camp is about attempting to address the underlying structural causes of climate change, which means working with social movements everywhere to bring about global system change, not just get people to drive/fly less, fit insulation or change their light bulbs.
Bolivian