to continue to support Extinction Rebellion

[54321nought]

carrying on from the first thread

here

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/a4327567-to-support-extinction-rebellion-more-London-action-tomorrow?msgid=110225062#110225062

I’ve been shocked at how the media has taken up the idea of a ‘staycation’ being something we need to endure until we can get on a plane and go abroad again. In my day a staycation was a few days when you went on day trips to places within reach of home, with dinner most likely at home in front of the telly.

When are you going to China to protest?

Hahaha exactly.

Probably at the same time womens rights activists go to Afghanistan.

Next thing you know, OP will do something silly like supporting the boycott of the upside down dairylea adverts...oh wait.

@ActonSquirrel

What I meant was they don't care about climate change because they are losing it over their holidays and plenty of threads are cropping up with people wanting a long haul holiday with a minimum 10 hour flight.

Sorry you didn't get that. Where did I say XR had anything to do with pcr tests?!

Most people don't care about climate change the way they are going on about their holidays. Was that clear enough for you this time.

Because of the quote you responded to which said

Do those of you who object to XR think the threat from climate change is not real? Or that it’s not very serious or urgent?

So I presumed your response was in regards to those objecting to XR. Why wouldn't I? I didn't realise it was just a random comment regarding people in general not those objecting to XR and not relevant to the bit you quoted.

Or are there loads of threads where people are objecting to XR because of their own 10 hour flight and PCR test?

What is an ordinary person? What ordinary person can afford to spend days dicking around in London disrupting people? Fly to Costa Rica for medical care?

It wasn't even medical care, it was a retreat where you get off your tits on psychedelics.
She's a joke.

@Seagullsstopit

What is an ordinary person? What ordinary person can afford to spend days dicking around in London disrupting people? Fly to Costa Rica for medical care?

It wasn't even medical care, it was a retreat where you get off your tits on psychedelics.
She's a joke.

Absolutely it was. She just though pretending it was for medical care was a better line. But that doesn't makebit any better either

@burritofan

And the totally non-biased source of that “we still need to drill for fossil fuels” article is… drumroll… the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

But are you saying oil is not used in that list? Biased or not, it's not incorrect...

Which one of you is Sarah Vine?

@Excelthetube

Sorry work from home zooming counting paper clips

Where can I find this role - it would be my ideal job!

But are you saying oil is not used in that list? Biased or not, it's not incorrect...
I’m saying it’s disingenuous and misleading to argue, “Oh, we need fossil fuels, here’s an article” and link to a biased source that of course is going to confirm we need fossil fuels.

We don’t. The IEA, the IPCC, and many more scientific research bodies with far more intelligence and clout than me or any other random on MN has made clear that there are future pathways with no new oil, gas or coal production needed. If we can make renewable energy, free from fossil fuels, of course we can make medicines, cosmetics, etc, without fossil fuels. Anything that can’t be made without them will have an alternative, either already or in research and development; or be banned and we catch up and find the technology to do something different: the way we did with CFCs. Plenty of research companies working on replacements and alternatives to fossil fuel-derived products.

The only people arguing for their continued production are the fossil fuel companies. Who also produced that article. Which was shared as though it were a legitimate source. And I think it’s important to point that out, especially on a chat forum where people spout all kinds of shite to support their agenda – particularly that poster, who’s on every climate thread denying that the climate emergency is manmade – and on the internet, where you can find a spurious link to support literally anything. The internet contains detailed instructions on how to make love to a dolphin, for goodness’ sake. It contains everything. Of course it’s going to contain “oil and gas are grrrrrrreat!” articles.

The biggest single thing an individual can do for the environment is reduce their meat intake.
Have an of you xr enthusiasts done that or considered it since it was brought up on the last thread?
No. Instead of some positive change, you've started another thread where you minimise and waive away the damage and distress xr cause to ordinary people.

And that 'personal individual changes is not enough' line is handy, isn't it? It means you can continue doing whatever the fuck you want to harm the planet as 'individual efforts don't matter'.

I'm vegan, so I feel perfectly comfortable calling you hypocrites with a clear conscience if you support harming others through xr and make no personal sacrifices yourself.
Not further responding to this thread because there are 900 posts of you ignoring the fact that xr actions hurt the most vulnerable and you don't care.

So hypocritical and uncaring.

Why don't you start a thread on all the positive actions xr can take that wouldn't disrupt the working people in London or people trying to get to the most specialist hospitals in the country?

I know why.

There are plenty of groups advocating for a reduction in meat consumption, Belle.

Which is great.

You have no way of knowing what choices other posters are making to reduce their carbon footprint.

@Darker

There are plenty of groups advocating for a reduction in meat consumption, Belle.

Which is great.

You have no way of knowing what choices other posters are making to reduce their carbon footprint.

No you don't have a way of knowing.

But people who dont support XR have had loads of assumptions about their own lifeastyles. Assumptions the not supporting XR means you don't have a shit about the climate crisis. That we just go about not giving a shit, living our life because we assum ot won't impact us.

Etc. Why is it fine when aimed at people who will not support XR, but not the other way round?

I haven’t made any such assumptions. Can you pick out an example of anyone stating that? It’s a complex issue and I did ask whether people believed in it but that was a question.

"XR" are hypocritical at best and downright criminal at worst. Their activities cause so much pollution, both through the extra traffic congestion they cause and through their own travel to get to London. I read that their Welsh group was causing the disruption in London the other day - why on earth were they not causing trouble in Cardiff or Swansea or Newport instead? No need to go to London for every protest.

If people were serious about tackling climate change they need to act on an individual level in meaningful ways. That means doing things like not having children, never flying or owning a car, never eating meat, never using public transport for non-essential travel, and importantly, never buying anything from China (at least until they clean up their act). Are those things easy? No, but it all reminds me of the bible story, "take the log of your own eye before criticizing the speck in mine."

@Darker

I haven’t made any such assumptions. Can you pick out an example of anyone stating that? It’s a complex issue and I did ask whether people believed in it but that was a question.

Did I say you made those statement?

But you are only pointing out that these assumptions have no basis, when it's aimed at pro xr posters.

Its odd you were on the other thread and never picked up on it, until now.

Its also odd to assumed people may not believe in climate change, because they don't like XR. Despite 2 threads saying the exact opposite.

@54321nought

They are not out to educate, or persuade the public, they are out to disrupt, and get government attention

Do XR really think the government really give a shit about a bunch of law breaking idiots? It's probably more a case of "Send riot police in and horses in, the twats are whinging again, Another biscuit with your tea home secretary?"

@Seagullsstopit

What is an ordinary person? What ordinary person can afford to spend days dicking around in London disrupting people? Fly to Costa Rica for medical care?

It wasn't even medical care, it was a retreat where you get off your tits on psychedelics.
She's a joke.

This. Did she admit to going to Costa Rica unprompted or did someone blow her cover?

I asked a question - that's not making an assumption.

My theory is that how we respond to XRs tactics depends on our belief about urgency of the situation.

If you believe its too late to wait for people to make changes of their own accord then XRs actions are likely to feel more legitimate.

If you think its not too late and that we should be persuading people to make changes and ALSO believe that XRs actions are likely to be counterproductive and will alienate people who are less committed to change, then I can see why XR are causing upset.

I am in the first camp.

If people were serious about tackling climate change they need to act on an individual level in meaningful ways. That means doing things like not having children, never flying or owning a car, never eating meat, never using public transport for non-essential travel, and importantly, never buying anything from China
Since you ask… Stopping at one child and can’t actually stuff her back up there, what’s done is done; I don’t fly, have scrapped my car, gone vegetarian and drastically reduced dairy consumption, walk everywhere, don’t buy anything any more (repair my possessions and clothes, a time privilege) other than food and try to grow my own (which is a privilege because I have a garden, as are lots of your points), changed my energy supplier, and most importantly, because this is actually the biggest impact, divested my pension, bank accounts, insurance and savings into companies that don’t fund fossil fuels.

But all that still puts the onus on individuals. When it’s the governments and financial institutions who need to step up and stop aiding and abetting fossil fuel companies. That’s what this current XR protest is about: disrupting the financing. Without funding and insurance, fossil fuel companies can’t exist. And that has a far greater impact than Ms Lefty-Leafy ordering a local veg box and switching to oat milk. And much individual action is a damn sight easier if you’re already privileged.

@AtticusHoysAnus

When are you going to China to protest?

Hahaha exactly.

Probably at the same time womens rights activists go to Afghanistan.

I'd be interested to hear and answer to this. Russia, China, America among others are far bigger culprits for global emissions and climate change. Why is XR not seen to target them ? As always a tiny little country like Britain is taking the full whack for the worlds problems and apologising YET again for our contribution whilst the other powers that be are laughing at us. We are a joke with our placards, super glue and paint stunts.

Is it true that they get pay to go and participate in the protests?

Why is XR not seen to target them?

XR is a global organisation. XR in the UK holds the UK to account.

@burritofan
If we can make renewable energy, free from fossil fuels, of course we can make medicines, cosmetics, etc, without fossil fuels.

But using oil in medicines and cosmetics releases zero CO2? So why should we stop drilling for and using oil for those purposes that are in fact carbon neutral?

If you are privileged enough to go to xr rallies. You are privileged enough to swap out meat for a few meals.

Lentils, pulses and beans all cheap btw.

That really is my last day on it. Great of you already do it, but op advocates eating chicken so is misinformed or doesn't care.