I wish I could go to the stakeholder conference, but I don't have the
time or the money. Let us know the outcome
Chris
SoW Net wrote:
> I was at the Schumacher Conference last Saturday when Bill McKibben
> presented his campaign for 350 ppmv global CO2 limit at www.350.org
> <http://www.350.org>, and checked it out with Aubrey to see how
> sensible it was. I have come to the conclusion that people just
> jumping up and down for the 350 limit, without knowing the political
> context, is not politically savvy enough. However, presented with C&C
> as a framework, and cognisant of the historically fraught relations
> between developed and developing countries, I support it - and
> hopefully will get a chance to do so at the EU stakeholder conference
> tomorrow in Brussels "Towards a comprehensive and ambitious post-2012
> climate change agreement in Copenhagen".
>
> Is anyone else in Crisis Forum going to it?
>
> Best wishes from Jim Scott
>
> *Sign up on-line to VALUE LIFE ITSELF ABOVE ALL ELSE !!!
> and support the
> NEW MOVEMENT FOR SURVIVAL
> **www.m-4-s.net* <http://www.m-4-s.net>* & **www.save-our-world.net*
> <http://www.save-our-world.net>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "CHRIS KEENE" <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> To: <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 11:44 PM
> Subject: Re: McKibbin Wilcoxen blueprint for Climate Policy
>
> > I'm glad that at least two of us think that way. It seemed to lean to
> > heavily towards what is 'politically realistic'. Problem is, it isn't
> > politically realistic to save the planet, which is why we need some
> bold
> > campaigns to remake politics, and change the boundaries of what is
> > 'politically realistic'. After all, political realism isn't an
> > objective concept, it's a purely subjective one, and almost always an
> > excuse for maintaining the status quo. It's the sort of thing we come
> > to expect from economists (most of them anyway, who are totally
> > brainwashed by neoliberal ideology these days)
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > PS Just because I send something to the list doesn't necessarily mean I
> > approve of it (in case you didn't notice!)
> >
> > Tom Barker wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone else think that this McKibbin-Wilcoxen idea is badly
> >> thought-out and pitiably naive? Just the sort of thing
> >> growth-dependent governments might cling to: a blueprint for a
> disaster.
> >> Tom
> >>
> >>
> >> Tom Barker BSc, PhD
> >> SWIMMER (Institute for Sustainable Water, Integrated Management, and
> >> Ecosystem Research)
> >> Nicholson Building
> >> University of Liverpool
> >> Liverpool
> >> L69 3GP
> >>
> >> 0151 795 4646
> >> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >>
> >> Support Contraction and Convergence - the global response to climate
> >> change
> >> http://www.gci.org.uk/
> >>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1711 - Release Date:
> 06/10/2008 17:37
|