Deleted User wrote: » very, very worrying to see posters talking about "deniers" in "camps". we really cannot allow this type of language to pass unopposed.
jackboy wrote: » My point is catastrophic climate change is guaranteed no matter what we do. Obsessing about carbon is a distraction. We need to prepare for the conditions that we know the planet will throw at us. Such preparation would highly likely indirectly reduce our carbon output anyway. Policies focusing on carbon will leave us wide open to the dangers of natural climate change.
Tell me how wrote: » That's a false equivalency. There is a difference between something which we have no control over, and something which we are ensuring occurs due to our behaviour.
easypazz wrote: » The greens will get enough seats to prop up another party. Then get blamed for everything and crash at next election. Rinse and repeat.
gozunda wrote: » Solutions for Klimatet Change Greta would agree! Change! #237
Micky 32 wrote: » Don’t get too excited they’ll never get in power.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Greens get another seat in Dublin in by election, the Greta effect in action! Good to see Dubliners are getting their priorities right.
Akrasia wrote: » It’s not just ‘that proposition’,You don’t agree with any proposition to tackle climate change. You may or may not be denying climate change, but by criticizing all proposals to tackle it without putting forward any credible alternative, you are in exactly the same camp as the climate change deniers
As for the deranged idea that those on a thread about gretas travels across the globe must provide solutions to climate change is risable. And the logic that anyone who fails to agree with that proposition are in effect deniers is hilarious.
YFlyer wrote: » Some good ideas there. Doesn't need to be all or nothing.
One Brazilian created a webpage to attribute blame for the South American country’s various ills to a cast of Hollywood stars. In it Tom Hanks was blamed for Brazil’s high taxes, Penélope Cruz for unemployment, Daniel Radcliffe for impunity, Johnny Depp for deforestation and Kate Winslet for its education crisis.
jackboy wrote: » There have been many many civilizations pressured and destroyed by climate change. This includes civilizations all over the world such as America, the Middle East and Asia like the Indus. Then we have events like the ice age. Do you think the current climate change that we are experiencing will be worse than an ice age?
Gynoid wrote: » Why stop at Amazon? Or, if they stop at Amazon the protesters are ideologically inconsistent. Which is in fact what they are anyway, well off people with many foreign trips in their past when 80% of the world have never been on a plane. So they should protest supermarkets to stop bananas, coffee, scallions, peppers, cereals, sauces, tea, wines, pretty much most of the contents of the shops being supplied as most of it is freighted from abroad and many of them from abusive situations. They should picket appliance and technology shops because ditto plus the dreadful mining of rare elements. They should protest outside furniture shops, in fact is there a single shop they should not picket? They are going to have their sustainably produced vegan shoe soles worn away to nothing..
Akrasia wrote: » Still waiting for this btw
Gynoid wrote: » Why stop at Amazon? Or, if they stop at Amazon the protesters are ideologically inconsistent. Which is in fact what they are anyway, well off people with many foreign trips in their past when 80% of the world have never been on a plane.So they should protest supermarkets to stop bananas, coffee, scallions, peppers, cereals, sauces, tea, wines, pretty much most of the contents of the shops being supplied as most of it is freighted from abroad and many of them from abusive situations. They should picket appliance and technology shops because ditto plus the dreadful mining of rare elements. They should protest outside furniture shops, in fact is there a single shop they should not picket? They are going to have their sustainably produced vegan shoe soles worn away to nothing..
Akrasia wrote: » Which civilization and what global climate event destroyed it?
biko wrote: »
Tuisceanch wrote: » Its early morning here in Dublin so chill your beans bro. I see your adopting one of the ploys from the standard playbook you people are so fond of, deluded by your thinking that nobody can see through you. You'll probably regret,as you get older, that you didn't try to engage more constructively with people as you might have learned something that was useful to you. So are you clear now that I have no further interest in talking to you or do you want to try out another of your ploys?
Gynoid wrote: » Okay. Ad hominen. It is an approach, I suppose.
Tuisceanch wrote: » No it's just that most people here don't like long posts and my original post was to remark on the fact that we are all guilty of hypocrisy.I only replied to you out of politeness without expressing any political opinion but just pointing out some blindingly obvious insights as to the reality of activism i.e. its purpose is to raise awareness by the most effective means possible. Since i'm not engaged or have any experience of social media campaigns it is rational for me to presume that I would not have any credibility with them if I was to advise them on their strategy. Actually I'm not so ignorant of economic theory, and in particular neo-liberalism, as I have already had some discussion about that subject and neo-keynesian with another poster, who has been studying the subject for 10 years. I find discussions with people like that informative and it also allows me to test my own understanding. For me that is the great benefit of sites like this. Unfortunately reasoned and intelligent voices like down tend to get drowned out by the more presumptive, anti-intellectual and argumentative style of posting which yours is an example of. Hence I tend not to pay much attention to those posts as nothing particularly useful entails from such exchanges but since I hadn't talked to you beforehand it seemed reasonable to see at least what you had to say. On reflection I wish I hadn't as I don't have much time for arrogant people. I had my fill of them working in the Financial Services industry.
Gynoid wrote: » Ah. What you illustrate in your response is tacit support for a mix of meritocracy and technocracy - you circumvent all opinions on any matters which do not fall within your narrowly specialised domain of expertise, leaving decisions on everything else to those who have been scientifically educated in precisely that demarcated area. Because that elite ''know best''. I don't like either meritocrcay or technocracy - they are essentially authoritarian and right wing rulership by selected (as opposed to elected) elites. I allow myself to have opinions as part of the unwashed demos in a democracy.
Tuisceanch wrote: » Well Black Friday is symbolic of mass consumerism so a protest directed against it would attract mass media attention which would be the objective. I wouldn't have known anything about it otherwise. I,personally,would be reluctant to instruct activists how they should or should not strategise as I have no involvement with any groups or expertise in the area, so they might not be inclined to listen to me. In fact they might tell me to f*** off. From a logical perspective if we want to curb our emissions then part of that approach probably needs to consider reducing consumption,although that means rethinking our current economic orthodoxy. However I don't have much economic expertise so i'll leave it to more qualified people on the thread to comment on the details and its feasibility.
gozunda wrote: » You forgot the rampant imaginations of a kid which makes for a good story Lol but I reckon you're getting a bit heavy on the old metaphysics there. Nah for sure just a bit of tongue in cheek humour . But theres defintly something about Dorothy and Gretas ability to get from A to B ... :pac:
The Coinage Act of 1873 ended the U.S. mint’s legally-authorized practice of converting silver bullion into legal tender at no cost. The “free silver” slogan referred to the price the mint would charge to convert bullion into coins: free coinage. Prior to this, except for the Civil War, the U.S. had a bimetallic monetary standard, coining both silver and gold at a fixed exchange rate.
The most pertinent difference between the book and the film is, in the book, the slippers/shoes Dorothy gets from the Wicked Witch of the East are silver, not ruby. So Dorothy journies clad in silver shoes on the yellow brick (gold) road, to the Land of Oz (“ounce,” of gold or silver). Both silver and gold take her there. Bimetallism.
On her way to the Land of Oz, Dorothy picks up her electoral coalition. First, the Scarecrow, representing western farmers.
Next, the Tin Man (or Tin Woodman). The working class man, once a true human, is now just a cog in the industrial machine.
The Cowardly Lion, then, was William Jennings Bryan himself. Capable of a great roar—his speeches were legendary—alas, to mix metaphors, he was all bark and no bite.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
