How absolutely fantastic is this talk? To paraphrase, "It's not enough to tell them what you are against. Instead, we must also articulate a clear set of values & positive vision of what we are for, and what we want to build."
This guy is a total scam. Also a Bright Green Lair. Up until a few years, he was raving about Nuclear Energy. And then right after the massive nuclear disaster of Fukushima Japan - He quickly changed colors, like a chameleon - to Green - In order to join and praise the GreenWash Capitalist Industry. Fuck this Bullshitter
Brilliant speech that must be heard by all mainstream (neoclassical) environmental economists who are busy with quantitative models to price the value of "natural capital" and "ecosystem services". My experience: Most of these environmental economists don't really understand how an ecosystem, as a complex, inter-connected and nonlinear living system, works.
I wish more people like George would lead and coordinate to help mobilisation as they understand it so well instead of just giving inspiring speeches. Not that this in any way tries to invalidate his efforts for he truly is getting heard. Bravo sir.
Reminds me of the US Federal Government analysis of job classifications. They valued all kinds of factors affecting employment and came up with a value for that contribution. My favorite conclusion was that being a bank manager or a bank robber had almost identical costs and rewards.
I did an economics degree at a mainstream Australian university. I then went into accounting and financial services. I started out my voting life voting for and being a very vocal supporter of the main right-wing party. I have since changed career, location, daily dress, voting behaviour (even going to the far left in one election), hairstyle etc. I therefore ask: how does one identify "the ones who will never be swayed"? I pressed the pause button at about 54:30 (then signed in to write this comment). Mr Monbiot accepted the applause but, as soon as the host said, "George will take some questions now", Mr Monbiot looked at his watch. It was for the second time that night... His critique of monetising nature, cost-benefit analysis etc. is one I agree with - very wholeheartedly. Qualitative is qualitative. By definition, it cannot be quantified - ever. With all due respect though, he is in no position to prescribe politics - and how it works etc. to anyone. None of us is in a position to do so... There are two facts at work here. In rank order: 1. Each one of us is here; and 2. The actions - and inactions - of others has an impact on us. In terms of what is to be done, "listen to all, follow none" is an old piece of wisdom. Politically, my view is that we should not have political parties - but I will be damned if I will ever force that view on political candidates, politicians, other voters, let alone the world at large. No, I will live by it for as long as I hold it. My anticipation as I write this is that I will hold this view probably until I die. But I am also wise enough to know that it is sheer folly to cement the future - in regards to anything, let alone oneself. My economics degree and former career have served me well in this respect: informing me of what is *not* being taught in mainstream academia. One example is the derivation of the word economy. It comes from old Greek, 'oikos' (pronounced 'ekos') and 'nomos'. The translation: 'oikos'/'eco' = 'house'; 'nomos'/'nomy' = 'management'. An economy is the management of one's house. It used to refer to a single household, family etc. One can expand it to a national economy or the world i.e. the world economy. Surely it is preceded by ecology, 'awareness of one's house'. In the case of 'the world economy', the house is, well.. planet Earth. That alone could also facilitate full employment i.e. for all time. Never learned any of this - even at the postgraduate level.
Perhaps Monbiot has a certain time to speak, hence checking his watch? Normally people just go on talking and getting completely out of the schedule they had. A good speaker knows how to pace himself and fit all the points he had - imo he is a good speaker. As for the economy, have you looked at any of the suggestions that promote a resource-based economy? At its heart its rather simple, if you consume stuff faster than it regenerates you will loose in the end. If anything our current system is consuming everything on the planet at an insane rate. How do we motivate people to value nature in a way that they understand the consequences of their actions? Again the current system, and indeed through religious myths, has elevated human kind as something special, a chosen one, taken us out of nature to the point where we watch nature documentaries on the TV without understanding that these are carefully framed shots and not how nature actually is anymore. Take a look at Knate Myers great shots from the ISS and the planet looks like its illuminating from all the human activity/impact. The after-life religious myths no doubt has made the average person not care anymore as there is "heaven" waiting for them - Earth is just a testing area for the deities. I think much of our problems comes down to the fact that the human species hasn't really evolved to wrap our minds around such complex issues as planetary health. Considering the speed humanity has come from being hunter-gatherer to where we are now, it's rather impossible for any real adaption. While a band of 10000 humans back then could at most make some big animal species extinct, the collective damage from 7 billion people is immense since we don't have a price on the consequences of our actions. I seriously doubt there is any system that can get enough traction to fix this behaviour unfortunately. Even though individuals can be enligthened to what needs to be done, it completely drowns in the cogs that drive society. Monbiot has made many talks about how the left has failed to come up with any good alternative.
A good speaker is aware, beforehand, how much time has been allocated and ensures that what is to be said fits within that timeframe. Audience members can be somewhere else as well. I find it off putting to see someone I have come to see look at his/her watch. In one sense, it is as if their mind is not on the subject matter. Why, then, should mine be? I think that many of our problems are artificial e.g. we insist on dividing parliaments into political party blocks. As I see it, society needs a space where it can sort out its issues. How do we ensure health in the community? How do we decide what a plot of land is to be used for? How do we ensure that essentials such as potable water are available for all? This is where resource based economics comes into play. It is a political question as well. It may be radical but I think parliaments, congresses etc. would be more democratic if representatives were not artificially locked into blocks. Among the effects of political parties is the subsequent ability to blame "the other side" for society's ills. It is a convenient, and more to the point cheap, way of taking the focus off one's own responsibility. I now vote for candidates who are independent of other politicians. They must answer to me. Now, it is easy to call this idealistic but, hold on, I do it - in practice. There is theory in existence on removing ourselves from money which is loaned into existence. It can be worked into existence and does not need to come from a bank. Nor does it need to be interest bearing. The scope of this line of enquiry goes beyond a RU-vid comment. I bring it up here because money, like parliaments, is another entirely artificial mechanism. Yes, mainstream banking has been developed over centuries and is entrenched but it is still being challenged - moreso now than ever before. I agree with Monbiot on quite a few of his points. None of this is easy though. We owe it to ourselves though to give it a shot. My main point is that it is a mistake to stop talking to people. Leaving it and returning and a later time? Yes. Complete dismissal as a nutter or something? I think that is a mistake. In the end, the person who disengages is a nutter. Reason: none of us has a monopoly on information, let alone the truth.
"Frames and Values". Values I somewhat understand. "Frames", to me, is more challenging. Are there some examples of the "frames" that George Monbiot proposes (perhaps in graphic form) that I (We) can study? Especially useful at the "local level"?
I love how he jokes about "deep thought" and the answer 42 as the meaning of life. But Adams might have unexpectedly tripped over parts of the solution to how one can go about moving towards a more resource based economy. While measuring the price on everything (including love and happiness) our brains are in fact trying desperately to solve this complex formula every day, which basically forms our behaviour. A large portion of the parameters into this equation is the current system that civilisation imposes upon us. How do I get food? Where do I meet people? What is legal (some choose to ignore this anyway)? Whenever a government or research team tries to describe these things they sound very funny when there are actual numbers put onto them, as it makes our lives feel less meaningfull - i.e. the formula of how to live your life becomes too visible. So part of the solution is, and here comes the scifi part, is to develop AI's that does all of this for us based on parameters we as a collective society inputs into it. The computer does not "feel" the numbers, and can solve the equation in a manner where people see the effects through better living standards, healthier and happier lives and preservation of nature. In the end its not about wealth and money, its about the essentials of a good life so surely a good AI can help us define this fairly so it benefits all life on the planet. Our tiny minds are having troubles coping with a single day of things to do so if anything we need better guidance towards making the right choices unless we want to seriously break this planet.
I just have to point out that around 35:45, the RU-vid sutitles missheard" fisher folk" for "official fuck"... Sry for being so imature on a serious topic, but I couldn't help but laught at that one.
So we are reduced to this alienated insane state. This is what comes of making ourselves the centre of things. Of imagining that the world, or the universe even, exists for our benefit. We have become terminal bullshit machines incapable of real thought, mouthing these pieces of nonsense to ourselves. God help us I say, rhetorically of course. That projection was only the first of so many absurdities.
