Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

What Al Gore Hasn't Told You About Global Warming

By David Morris, AlterNet. Posted January 9, 2007.


George Monbiot's new book Heat picks up where Al Gore left off on global warming, offering real solutions without sugar-coating the large personal sacrifices they will require.
01092007story
Advertisement

Al Gore is our generation's Paul Revere. Riding hard through the country, he warns us of the impending arrival of climatic disaster. He's proven an astonishingly effective messenger. An Inconvenient Truth may receive an Oscar for Best Documentary. Overflow crowds greet his presentations with standing ovations.

Which, come to think of it, is odd. When has someone ever delivered such an ominous message to such tumultuous applause? (Aside from those who insist we are in the end times and the rapture is near.)

In a recent speech to a standing-room-only audience at the New York University School of Law, Gore declared, "We are moving closer to several 'tipping points' that could -- within as little as 10 years -- make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable damage to the planet's habitability for human civilization." The audience cheered wildly. Presumably audiences are not cheered by the prospect of imminent catastrophe. So what is going on here?

British journalist George Monbiot, author of Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning (Doubleday, 2006) has a theory.

"We wish our governments to pretend to act," he writes. "We get the moral satisfaction of saying what we know to be right, without the discomfort of doing it. My fear is that the political parties in most rich nations have already recognized this. They know that we want tough targets, but that we also want those targets to be missed. They know that we will grumble about their failure to curb climate change, but that we will not take to the streets. They know that nobody ever rioted for austerity."

Austerity? Hold on. Al Gore and the rest of the U.S. environmental movement never utter the word "austerity." Their word of choice is "opportunity." The prospect of global warming, they maintain, can serve as a much-needed catalyst to spur us to action. A large dose of political will may be required, but we need not anticipate economic pain. We can stop global warming in its tracks, expand our economy and improve our quality of life. We can, in other words, do good and do quite well. A leading environmentalist, for whom I have a great deal of admiration, summed up his position to an interviewer, "I can't stand it when people say, 'Taking action on climate change is going to be extremely difficult.'"

And there's the rub, as dear Hamlet would say. By claiming we can solve the problem of climate change painlessly, environmentalists confuse us. They offer stark and rigorous presentations terrifying us about the near-term, dire consequences of global warming. And then they offer generalized, almost blithe assurances about how we can avoid these dire consequences without great sacrifice. We are horrified and soothed at the same time. It's a dangerous strategy. Many who focus on the catastrophic present-day images of An Inconvenient Truth believe we have gone beyond the point of no return, which leads to cynicism and passivity. Those who are spurred to action believe that buying a hybrid car or taking an eco-vacation will address the problem.

Indeed, the "take action" section of Al Gore's website, www.climatecrisis.net recommends the following steps. Put on a sweater. Use more efficient light bulbs. Turn the thermostat down 2 degrees. Drive less.

I'm sure Al Gore knows that even if millions of individuals were to adopt such actions, the pace of ecological disaster would not slow one whit. I presume he views these actions as a way for us to demonstrate our willingness accept responsibility for our consumption habits. The next, and far more important, step is to persuade us to work collectively and aggressively for bold new policies. A recent letter from Al Gore, emailed from MoveOn.org asked us to do just that by signing a petition to push Congress to action.

Gore declared, "I'm ready to push for real solutions, but I need your help ..." The email offered no policy solutions. Nor does Al Gore's web site or speeches, except for his recommendation that America immediately freeze its greenhouse gas emissions and then reduce them.

George Monbiot, a reporter for the British newspaper, Guardian takes up where Al Gore and many others leave off. Heat is a remarkable book. For it is not written to convince the unconvinced global warming, but to educate the already-persuaded, those who exited the theater after watching An Inconvenient Truth with fire in their bellies, ready to fight the incoming menace about what must be done, and ready to face the significant sacrifices that will have to be made along the way.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: global warming, climate change, al gore, inconvenient truth, monbiot, heat

David Morris is co-founder and vice president of the Institute for Local Self Reliance in Minneapolis, Minnnesota and director of its New Rules project.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Crazy World
Posted by: edith on Jan 9, 2007 12:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the tipping point is ten, or even twenty years away, the combination of controls(you can't drive to the store) and taxes(another name for the polite carbon credits) has to be implemented. Right now, the debate in the US is whether or not to let the Bush tax policies expire to finance Medicare and Social Security, and how to avoid the extension of the alternate minimum tax to the middle class(i.e., a huge revenue reducer for the middle class). Furthermore, capitalists and "progressives" circle each other warily but seductively in a dance meant to legalize millions of illegal immmigrants in the US who will consume more energy in the USA than in their godforsaken villages in Mexico, Central America or China.

There is another "solution"" do nothing and let insurance costs and real estate valuations price climate change over time. Let the consumer pay the costs of climate change without govt subsidy. To the extent the forecasts are excessive, the consumer saves money. To the extent Monbiot et al are correct, the consumer pays without the costly intervention of govt and its "carbon credit" scheme.

I suppose I shall enrage the progressives of Alternet when I say that most Americans do not care if millions die in third world countries (well, we don't care if millions of Iraqis die; we are just upset we are not winning.) and so until the pain is felt in richer countries, no one gives a damn. So I am not sure what the Monbiots are appealing to: if it's our consciences, that is a lovely Shavian 19th century sort of idealism that died the moment the first SUV hit the highways and the moment more Americans went to Malls than voted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Crazy World Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: kjmclark
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: JimTheAnarchist
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: HeroesAll
» Hear! Hear! Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: Pirate1
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: b4upoo
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: edith
» RE: Crazy World Posted by: ncg96773
More Than Driving A Prius
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 9, 2007 1:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The soft sell at the Climate Crisis website is to get them in the door, the real truth is a whole lot more ugly. To be fair, baby steps are O.K. as long as you progress to a full gait and then a run. That's what it's going to take.

The whole matrix of our economy, geographic distribution and infrastructure have been defined by cheap carbon based fuel and will not work well in a sustainable economy. Do you think the people who have bought houses 75-100 miles from their workplaces (NYC, DC LA, etc) where no public transit exists are going to keep living that way? How about millions of people living in deserts with 12 month a year air conditioning and water pumped hundreds of miles uphill at great cost?

When jet travel costs skyrocket because of ever increasing fuel prices and ever falling public subsidies (the US has $9 trillion in Federal public debt), do you think our airports will be packed with sales reps and marketers? How about the 1500 mile salad? Or grapes shipped from Chile (look at that on a globe- they are flown in)?

I'll save you the rest, but it's going to be disruptive, painful and as sure as the sunrise. The only questions pertain as to when, how and are we willing or will events force us to. Sugar pills will not do.

FYI- Over it's life cycle, a Prius, from manufacturing to disposal, uses more energy and generates more greenhouse gases than a conventional compact car, due primarily to manufacturing. That's also before Toyota ships a ton plus of car halfway around the world. See, appearances can be deceptive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More Than Driving A Prius Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: More Than Driving A Prius Posted by: vuturistic
» RE: More Than Driving A Prius Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: More Than Driving A Prius Posted by: NoPCZone
A crucial point not mentioned in this article
Posted by: HeroesAll on Jan 9, 2007 1:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One point that Monbiot made in the book, and emphasised in an interview I did with him a couple of months ago, is that all of his suggestions are possible with current technology.

We don't need to wait for improvements in engine efficiency, or the invention of economically viable fuel cells: everything can be done with technology we now have, at an economically viable cost. Note that I don't say a politically acceptable cost, because politics relies on a whole swag of emotional responses, and on social and political greed/selfishness/fear of change.

But we can do it, within the very short time frame. I think it behoves us to try, and to convince others of the necessity. The world will change drastically in the next few decades: the only question is whether we try to aim for a positive change, or sit back and accept the worst.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What NOBODY's told you about Global Warming
Posted by: gwill on Jan 9, 2007 2:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From a United Nations news release:

"29 November 2006, Rome - Which causes more greenhouse gas emissions, rearing cattle or driving cars?

Surprise!

According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport. It is also a major source of land and water degradation."

That release is at http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html

What you eat -- meat vs. veggies -- could have more impact on global warming (at least in the short term) than how much you drive.

The report, _Livestock's Long Shadow_, is a free PDF download at the FAO site.

I've found _very_ little in the media on this -- could it be just TOO inconvenient a truth???

Greg Williams
Kentucky, USA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What NOBODY's told you about Global Warming Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
Do you think our supersystem is going to permit any of this?
Posted by: notabilia on Jan 9, 2007 2:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course Monbiot provides necessary information, but could we, as thinking people, take an honest, self-critical look at our supersystem, the interlocking practices and workings of power that are arranged all around us, and see how far gone we are? Do you think the rich and the profiteering are going to give it all up? Do you think there is any opening in the current religious-military-anti-intellectual-political parade of entrenched charlatans for radical regulation? We cannot back up our own current laws with a fraction of enforcement - the rich and the corporations are fleecing and robbing and destroying to a monolithic degree - and we are supposed to show them a study that will get them to step aside? We have no capacity to do this kind of "Austerity" - none. A proclamation that we can do this in the next ten years is laughable. Can our progressive Names please get some mature seriousness in their statements, and start voicing our hard-earned despair at ourselves, our complicities, our limitations, and our chilling capacity for avoidance of blame?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yea But You Go First
Posted by: marxalot on Jan 9, 2007 3:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who will step up and begin. Which politician has the political courage and the clout, influence and power to even begin this process in which we all pay in economic pain now for the avoidance of global catastrophe later?

In my life of 51 years I have never seen such an animal. Not until New York City is waste deep in seawater. Then there will be righteous indignation and blame.

I saw a stretch Hummer tooling around Galveston again the other day. Man, I can't even envision a fantasy version of a way out of this mess.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yea But You Go First Posted by: HeroesAll
» RE: Yea But You Go First Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Yea But You Go First Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» Hummer Posted by: hbw
» RE: Yea But You Go First Posted by: JimTheAnarchist
» RE: Yea But You Go First Posted by: b4upoo
Something I never hear in these debates-part 1
Posted by: vuturistic on Jan 9, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is always amazing to me that when it comes to global warming (a subject I have been debating for over 30 years) the one thing I never hear from people and that I get a great deal of flack from is the fact that simply reducing consumption, curbiing emissions, making better eco-choices don't seem to include the one thing that is compounding the situation and what, in my opinion, makes me believe that we have already gone over the tipping point some time ago. The issue that I am talking about? Let me give you a hint.

Every time you switch off a light, consolidate shopping trips, car pool, recycle, sacrificially give up a cross country trip or a vacation to the other side of the word, the population of the world has gone up several hundred thousand (100,000). All those new people are coming into the world faster than those of us presently doing all this consuming (and sacrificial conservation) are leaving. Hungry new mouths to feed and drink and consume even more. So, until we learn to make the ultimate sacrifice and reduce the number of children we bring into the world so the population gets back to some reasonably sustainable number (like, say, 2 or 3 billion, instead of approaching 7 billion and beyond)

Here's a relatively easy way to visualize the impact of this. In 1950 there were about 2 billion people populating the planet. Now, only 57 years later, we have three to four times that. Imagine you are in an average room (say, 12x12 feet) and there are three other people in there with you. It is 1950 and the four of you are moderately comfortable. Now jump forward to the present and that room has eleven people in it. It takes more of everything to keep those eleven comforable (and that's not including the reduction in personal space which adds an invisible threat in cultural comfort zones like the United States where people get way to nervous and uptight if you get too close. (I theorize this is one of the biggest factors in the increase of violent behaviors like road rage.)

If populations had stabilized at around 3 billion, our present consumption as a species would be less than half of what it is today.

I've become more cynical and less optimistic as I grow older as I see major religions of the world becoming more rigid and fundamentalist in nature tauting things like big families and telling members abortions, singlehood and non-believers are bad. I am not saying I'm against children. I think kids are great. (I was one once myself.) And certainly the future would look equally as bleak without them as with unchecked numbers of them. Human nature being what it is, people will never stop having babies. Unlike the rest of nature on this planet, we are in the unique position to manipulate the environment to our advantage but we have done so at the peril of ourselves and almost every other living creature on the planet.

I hear biblical literalists spout prophecy that we are in the end times and Armaggedon was foretold. I submit that the nomadic tribes of three millennia in the past had no clue about what is transpiring today and if I held to the belief that the Good Book was indeed written by the Almighty and He knew about such things, I cannot for one nanosecond believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful and all-loving god would not have given a more prudent and cautious warning than 'be fruitful and multiply.' I can imagine those kinds of thoughts coming out of the minds of 3,000 year old primitive tribal priests who saw their little corner of the world was better preserved for their progeny through strength in numbers. It worked back then but it is 3,000 years later and we are still collectively thinking somewhat like that throughout most of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Actually... Posted by: vangogh69
» The Neocon solution Posted by: dkm
» RE: Voluntary Human Extinction Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» Curb immigration Posted by: Logic's Edge
Something I never hear in these debates-part 2
Posted by: vuturistic on Jan 9, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those who hold literalist views of bibilical scripture are right about one thing, we are living in the end times and when it comes there will be no one left to listen to Mozart or watch The Greatest Story Ever Told. It will not matter that Jesus walked the earth to save us all from sin when there are none left to have sin. All the efforts of Plato, Socrates, Shakespeare, Sun Yat Sin, Leonardo da Vinci, Galileo Galilei, Benjamin Franklin, Charlemagne, and all the rest we hold in such high human regard and every one who lived and loved and died will be all for nothing. Because when we are no more then all that we have ever done as a species will be for absolutely nothing. Whatever god or gods or goddesses or otherwise deities we each believe in will no longer matter because no human thought will exist to contemplate the existence of a supreme being.

So, we had better wise up and see the big picture pretty darn quick but then we're all so busy arguing and fighting with one another to really, really care about whether our vastly superior intellectual species survives another few centuries to make the trillions and trillions of hours of collect human thought that all of us since time began have put into telling each other how vastly more intelligent we are than anything that has ever existed before or since.

I hope I make millions of people really angry by what I have said. I hope that you all get so angry that you just say, it is not easy and no one can make a lonlier or bigger sacrifice than to decide not to have children because that is what I decided to do and I am here to tell you, it is lonely and it is empty but I have found ways to live a fulfilling and meaningful life and to help others and contribute to society and my community. I always felt I missed something by not having children but I know I made the right choice because it has given me the time and insight to help others who never would have had someone stop and share and tell them they mattered and they could make a difference.

You matter and you can make a difference. We all matter and we can all make a difference. It's simple. It is difficult but it is simple. What a terrible, terrible, terrible waste if we let it all come to an end because we couldn't figure out how to all live together in a sustainable world.

In the spirit of a song: In the year 2525, if man is still alive, if someone has survived they may find...these words and know that those of us living in 2007 had the care and the courage to do what we have to do to ensure that those 26th centururians will be there to live and love and laugh and sing and experience all the other wonderful things about being alive and being human. We are all parents of the human race and it is up to each and every one of us to protect and ensure the safety and survival of our global village's children--whatever it takes.

I hope I have been appropriately thoughtful. I don't know that I've been profound though I'd like to be thought of that way. It is, in any event, most deeply and passionately heartfelt in the spirit of caring love.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nuclear Energy is a fool's errand Posted by: Michael Robin
» THANK YOU Posted by: Artemis3
Why not walk to the shop?
Posted by: Swatopluk on Jan 9, 2007 4:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Again one of the great differences between the US and Central Europe.
The concept of reducing emissons by letting the shops deliver the goods to the people instead of them driving their own car to the shops would completely fail over here. European towns and cities are usually organized in a way that one can either walk to the shop or use public transport. In my experience cars are usually not used because of distance but because of weight (i.e. covering only a minor part of all shopping trips). In other words, this idea would probably work well in the US but not over here (and we on average drive more efficient cars anyway).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why not walk to the shop? Posted by: vangogh69
Self-interest ?
Posted by: jefhadist on Jan 9, 2007 4:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"People rarely do things in their own best self interest....let alone mine." And that feels to be the crux of the matter. How to encourage, cajole, teach, convince, beg and/or peacefully "force" folks to do something for the good of the whole. We've been on this trajectory at least since WWII. Call it what you will. Until folks get smart about their effect on the world in every aspect of their choices....the exertion of their will for SELF alone, or for their own little clan, will keep digging us deeper into "no exit." Millions of individual choices do add up to x amount of carbon reduction... but to tell folks in developing regions they can't have what we take for granted is ludicrous. If we don't lead by example, forget about it. And Gore praising Walmart for supposedly going "green" ain't going to save the planet. What a joke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Self-interest ? Posted by: reubenj
This writer can't be that stupid.
Posted by: ebennett46 on Jan 9, 2007 4:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have only read the first three paragraphs. These people are honoring Gore for getting the word out before it it too late -- DUH! Please don't be completely THICK here. I don't have time for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Granddaddy of All Solutions
Posted by: danielgeery on Jan 9, 2007 4:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I almost joined this group by accident, but for the fact that I ended up with one child of my own. There is no question as to whether our numbers will be reduced, but rather how we'll go about it--the easy way or the hard way.

Here are some thoughts worth pondering:

Voluntary Movement for the Extinction of Humans

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Voluntary Measures? LMAO!!
Posted by: MAD on Jan 9, 2007 5:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I said it before and I'll repeat it here. The "voluntary" phase of half measures aimed at modestly slowing environmental degradation has come to a close. It's now time to implement "forced" measures. Now we only have to get the government on board. *Uproarious Fit of Hysterical Laughter*

We just don't seem to get it and I don't think we ever will. Even if global warming is a myth, something I find unlikely, we remain on a collision course with disaster. The Amazon is still burning and topsoil is being sterilized. Anyone been to China lately? Desertification is only one of their numerous problems. Safe drinking water is mainly a luxury and the rest of the world continues to use that country as a dumping ground. Come to think of it, safe drinking water is mainly a luxury for an unthinkable number of people worldwide. Humans have demonstrated that they aren't up to the task and no amount of goading will change our habits. Time to put away the carrot and the stick and break out the clubs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's all propaganda
Posted by: jack alexander on Jan 9, 2007 5:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm leftwing/liberal/progressive, but I have taken enough college courses to learn when I am being flim-flammed.

All of these 'Green' people want us to change our lives this way or that. In other words sacrifice. And if we listen to them we WILL sacrifice.

All of them have an ulterior motive and that is the parasitic capitalist mind-set. They only want us to stop doing this or that so that they and their cohorts can sell us alternatives that will cost us money---lots of it.

The fact is that the planet, for a lack of a better phrase, is a living, variable organism. It has been changing for eons and will continue to do so for a long time to come. The latest theory for the demise of the dinosaurs is that they died because of global warming...previously we were sold the idea that they froze to death because of a meteor hitting the earth causing a 'nuclear-like' winter.

The planet is also being polluted (natually) be various volcanos and experiments that took place in the 60s and 70 by the HAARP project (and the Soviet counter part) which blew holes in the ozone that could take 100 or more years to naturally 'heal'.

I choose to believe this scientest (a pdf is attached to the article): http://geobay.com/e1d6bb

Global warming clap-trap is just a ploy at trying to control us and bleed us for more money. It is also a convenient smoke screen to take our dumbed down herd-mentality minds off of real issues such as the criminal acts of war crimes being commited against humanity . Include into this that our fearless leader has instituted a 'Unitary' goverment (just like they gave Adolf in the 30s and 40s). Adolf caused a lot of chaos very quickly when that power was allowed him by the German people.

Many of our constitutional rights and civil rights are being nullified or abused daily at an increasing rate. In order for the criminals to get these crimes against us they have to instill fear in the public and this smoke screen is just one way to do it. The imaginary danger from another race/religion/system of government which is not ours is another tool being used to instill this fear and increase the power of the herd mentality mind-set.

The world changes all of the time. Some things as mentioned above and the effects of solar activity do these kinds of things to the weather. It is a gradual occurance and there is nothing we can do to change it (except stop the government from burning holes in the ozone layer).

I remember from my history lessons that as little as just over 100 years ago parts of Europe was frozen over due to a mini ice age. People didn't huddle in fear and change or stop major parts of thier lives. They adapted and survived well enough to produce a good many of us now living in the Americas.

Right now the solution for this problem is to stop listening to these fear mongers, the government and get on with life while listening to the real problems society faces such as fascist/neo-nazi war mongering (for profit) and start to make major changes in our governments....

AND: CHIMPEACH, try the chimp and his minions and put them in prison so that they can do no more harm to us and humanity...

Living in Little Saigon, CA (remember the commies were going to overrun us via the 'Domino Effect'?, as a buddhist:

I am Jack Alexander and this is what I know to be true.

How about you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: futurefarm
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: jack alexander
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: grolan
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: jack alexander
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: amiabledave
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: jack alexander
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: TagsNOLA
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: NowYogi
» RE: It's all propaganda Posted by: ng1944
That's all well and good, but ...
Posted by: LMNOP on Jan 9, 2007 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Complete Cynic's Guide to the Corporatocracy's Response to Global Warming:

That's all well and good, but ...

... you're talking about Americans. If we're anything, we're self-centered, easily duped, in the dark and in search of whatever is easy. Our leadership is greedy, arrogant, irresponsible and feels entitled. I wonder what's going to happen. If he cannot act responsibly, man deserves his fate. Maybe evolution *should* go back to the drawing board and try again. Next time, the intelligence that evolves will be able to study their narcissistic ancestor's artifacts and see what we did to ourselves, and perhaps do better.

"Since the U.S. and UK generate a disproportionate amount of global greenhouse gases, a responsible approach presumably would require them to disproportionately reduce their emissions."

Why do you hate freedom and prosperity? This is more of that socialist, class warfare crap from the pinkos. If we give in to the environment, then the terrorists have won.

""(W)hat would a responsible approach to the climate crisis look like if we had one in America?""

Classified, sequestered and unread.

"Thus, to save the planet and cleanse our resource sins, Americans must go far beyond freezing greenhouse gas emissions. As a nation, we must reduce them by more than 90 percent, taking into account the sharp reductions in existing global emissions necessary to stabilize the world's climate."

No way, then. America would rather destroy the earth than do that. Besides, most of the people who make such decisions are either expecting the second coming and the destruction of the earth from that any minute now, or else are too old, greedy and selfish to care about posterity. And the typical American is not going to make any sacrifices voluntarily. You do the math.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Neither Gore nor Monboit actually address the issue much less push real solutions forward. It's all
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 9, 2007 5:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the same BS. It's one thing to be condescended by the elites telling us to "conserve" even while they're the ones that promote the policies that created the waste and destroy environment in the first place.

P.S.: It's a shame that Alternet won't expose Gore's voting record while he was in office. Saying yes to NAFTA, staying silent while senators allowed funding for solar and wind to languish, joining Clinton and the rest of the ilk in both parties when it came to allowing "voluntary" cleanup efforts by Big Auto, staying silent even while the Senate vote for the Kyoto Treaty though not perfect was a strong NAY, praising the DEA for bombing out the hemp farm in South Dakota and calling hemp a "dangerous drug" instead of fighting to allow industrial hemp to enter the "free" market, ... you get the picture. I used to think that Gore really cared for the environment but for all his gloom and doom talk and his hypocritical voting record, it just makes me a PISSED OFF DEMOCRAT. And Monboit offers no solutions either other than telling us to give up everything ! With this kind of attitude, these guys are nothing but FAILURES !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Have you read Monbiot's book? Posted by: HeroesAll
» AND phoney Posted by: NowYogi