Hi, yes, a very big stick, but also a very big carrot.....whats in it for 
ordinary people. (I love silly questions like that....they can give profound 
answers. in this case, a new and abundant life, not the old, decayed system, 
for the 99%. Howzat?
Graham
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Barker, Tom" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: Naomi Klein: Climate change, capitalism and the transformation 
of cultural values


Hi folks

I just want to bring to your attention a hysteresis graph (attached). This 
shows two dynamic system states that are commonly found in nature. They can 
occur in the same space at different times, state A being good for us and 
state B being degraded. For example, an ecosystem in state A will be high 
quality with lots of species and healthy functioning. In state B it will be 
degraded, homogenised and unable to support the sort of complex life we 
associate with high quality environments. Stabilising mechanisms (mostly 
negative feedbacks) hold the system in its current state. The diagonal blue 
line shows where the environmental driver (horizontal axis) would push the 
system if it were not for the stabilising mechanisms.

Importantly, a system can withstand a lot of knocks and remain in its 
current state provided the stabilising mechanisms are intact, because they 
buffer the system against change. If however, the stabilisers are degraded 
or weakened, which occurs with progressive environmental change (horizontal 
axis), the system will eventually flip into the degraded state, whereupon a 
new set of stabilising mechanisms will hold it there, whatever we do. The 
system can also be pushed into the degraded state early by some shock.

If consequently the environmental driver is reduced, the system will not 
return to the former (high quality) state. It follows the path on the graph, 
held there by the stabilising mechanisms of the degraded state. (eventually, 
after who knows how many years or centuries, the environmental driver might 
have reduced to very low levels, and then the system will flip back, as per 
the graph.

This happens in many dynamic systems. It was discovered in ecosystems and is 
recognised generally but not universally. All the evidence seems to point to 
the Earth climate-system being dynamic in the same way. Once it goes past an 
unknown point, it will flip to a new state, effectively permanently (for us 
and our descendants anyway). It is also called non-linear change (the blue 
line would be linear).
I think it means we have to act decisively and not rely solely on a subtle 
change in attitudes to bring about behavioural change. I'm all for carrots, 
but we need a big stick now too.
Tom


-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum 
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Levene
Sent: 14 November 2011 09:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Naomi Klein: Climate change, capitalism and the transformation 
of cultural values

Graham,

presume you mean Naomi Klein, not Wolf  whose insights remain vapid.

On conference, there is an ongoing series of Crisis Forum workshops where
you might want to put your oar in (?)

see Workshop 6: Securing the System: Geo-political Implications for the
Present World Order http://www.crisis-forum.org.uk/events/workshop6.php

for the imminent next Friday November 25 at Winchester University. if you or
anybody else wants to participate I'd get your skates on and sign up through
our coordinator,  Marianne <[log in to unmask]> today! We're
having to confirm numbers no later than Weds!

cheers,
mark





on 14/11/11 9:14 am, Omega Institute at [log in to unmask] wrote:

> Hullo and thanks for the kind words.
> Sadly, I think I am on the right track. it does not look good.
> Naomi Wolfe is definitely ahead of the pack, with her analysis.This needs 
> to
> be built on.
>
> The issue is simply, can intellectuals work out a framework, and a 
> stratergy,
> that is of practical use, for the 99%, to deal with the issues, now
> intertwined like snakes, of climate change, economic crisis, and political
> crisis. if not, we are wasting our time. There is actually, no rational
> political theory yet, although some good analysis, (investigation) of the
> situation. It needs coherance, and structure. This is not some idle
> intellectual debate. if we get it wrong, it could quite literally, cost us 
> the
> Earth. That bad. if we get it right, we get it back. Simple.
>
> So:
> Can, and should, we transform the debate on here, into something more
> concrete, should there be some sort of UK conference, at an academic 
> location,
> in the new year, and things go further? or is that too early? I think a
> conference would be over-subscribed, without a doubt. But what would we 
> say?.
> Comments.
>
> I think, with some concern, that this actually does have some very serious
> aspects, that are of practical use. The situation,in Greece, is now 
> reaching
> the point where living standards have crashed, some families go to bed at
> night hungry, and social networking is the only thing keeping things going 
> for
> about a quarter of the population. I think the situation is beginning to
> resemble the Argentinian crisis, which was very creatively sorted out, by 
> a
> default, and serious social measures. The banksters howled. The greeks 
> could
> get oil from Venezuala, and much else from non-western sources. Thy will 
> cope.
> But failing an American backed military coup, there is not a lot that can 
> be
> done to stop them, at this point.
>
> What is important, is that the Greek crisis does not have enough exposure, 
> or
> anlysis, in this forum, and there is much to be observed, and learned. It 
> will
> be a strong indicator of what else is to come, in Eastern and balkan 
> europe.
> Also in developing countries.
>
> Comments?
> Graham
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kevin Coleman<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 11:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Naomi Klein: Climate change, capitalism and the 
> transformation of
> cultural values
>
> Amazing insight into what will or may happen when it all collapses from 
> both
> Steve and Graham. 2017 was the latest date given for the point of no 
> return. I
> wonder just how much we can learn and prepare before then before the 
> powers
> that be decide to control everything? After all they are not totally blind 
> to
> what is happening and will pull the plug a lot sooner than 2017.
> Incidentally I received a message from a friend in Canada reference 'Seven
> Blunders of the World' in response to some photo competition on the new
> environmental Seven Wonders of the Natural World.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Blunders_of_the_World
>
> Kind of fits with some of the causes and aspects of what is being 
> discussed.
> Kev C
>
> On 12/11/2011 20:39, Omega Institute wrote:
> Sadly,
> Mad Max is going to be much closer to the truth than Ghandi.
> The thing about well developed, well entrenched social structures, like
> capitalism, is that they are seldom overthrown, or replaced, with 
> something
> else. The Bolshevik revolution is an example where it was, due to the 
> internal
> collapse of the Czarist elite through war exhaustion.
>
> likewise, German capitalism was overthrown by the National Socialists, in
> 1933, under similar circumstances.
>
> My point: Globally, for the first time,we are approaching a similar 
> situation.
> I expect, by next Spring, huge events will have happened. It is probable 
> they
> will be all bad, and the present international system will be collapsing, 
> or
> gravely weakened, at least in part, in some areas. In such conditions,
> emergency administrations and state entities emerge. It is socio-political
> dynamics, plain and simple, driven by events.  I expect Greece to go over 
> the
> brink first. It is physically in Europe, but still culturally orientalist, 
> in
> many ways, due to a thousand years of oriental occupation. It will not 
> behave,
> as a matter of fact, in a Western European way, during the next phase of 
> the
> crisis. QED. It will be an indicator, of how non-Western European 
> countries,
> will react.
>
> This may well happen, in other places, as well. A mosaic, which might 
> merge,
> or be isolated, (like Cuba, North Korea, etc) and unless subjected to an 
> iraq
> type intervention, liable to be a dangerous source of "Infection" of the 
> West.
>
> The situation, as usual, will be utterly beyond the control of 
> intellectuals,
> but might well be influenced by them. that is why I said we must act like
> Leninists, organizationally, (but not like Marxists). We must move, under 
> the
> impact of events, to a new paradigm, which in itself will not stop climate
> change, and climate catastrophe, but will give us a framework of policies 
> and
> ideas for  survivalist stratergy. Upmost, is to resist. This means, huge
> pressures to be exerted on the elites, to force them to confront the 
> issues,
> and make preparations, for some sort of social survival process, that is
> oriented to the 99%, not the 1%. (in UK, thats 600,000 people, in the
> leadership and control cadre, of the economy, administration, knowledge
> system, etc etc......) not a lot to frighten into some sort of response. 
> This
> is possible.
>
> To use violence, by the way, may well be an eventual stage, as the elites
> simply tear up the law, and democracy, and take the existing "War on 
> terror"
> repression, to its ultimate logical conclusion. It will be something 
> forced on
> the 99%, not started by them. it will be horrendus. Think Nazi Germany
> combined with North Korea, under conditions of climate catastrophe, and
> economic systems collapse. America is aready passing out of the 
> pre-fascist
> condition, and into the first stage  of transition from a Government to a
> regime. UK is going down the track.
>
> in such circumstances, there is a limited time span, in which to establish 
> a
> coherant set of ideas and stratergies, before state repression effectively
> stops further work, on any significant scale. I think we have less than 
> five
> years. We have so little time.
> Regards
> Graham Ennis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kevin Coleman<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 7:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Naomi Klein: Climate change, capitalism and the 
> transformation of
> cultural values
>
> Well Steve,
> I have to agree in principle with your summation. However before we can 
> become
> a unified force of resistance we need foundations to fight or work from,
> whichever term you care to use. I have to confess I was reluctant to speak 
> in
> terms of acts of war, violence, resistance or other such items of change 
> be
> they violent or merely down right vicious. I did not wish to offend the
> sensibilities of the forum in such a way. However to refer to me as a 
> 'rat' is
> a little bit demeaning. I fear you have misunderstood my premise. But 
> worry
> not I can survive much (not necessarily everything though) and I certainly
> would not wish to be confined to a bunker or a bunker mentality. I see the
> future as I get there. Being prepared also involves being organised to the
> point of having a valid plan of action. It is also a form of aspiration to
> 'hope for better' in the dark times so it is not entirely an act of 
> submission
> to circumstances. Besides it is impossible to act in response to something
> until something has happened or is actually happening.
>
> As it was pointed out, we cannot know with absolute certainty what the 
> future
> holds so lets not get embroiled with guess work and instead build up our
> preparedness for any eventuality instead. That is to my way of thinking a 
> more
> productive use of time (which is now limited to 2017 according to the 
> latest
> calculations) and resources (which are dwindling faster than we can 
> replenish
> them).
>
> A fellow forum member went to a climate crisis conference today and gave 
> me a
> very brief run down of events. The people there sum up the survival 
> instinct
> of humanity with their enthusiasm for seeking solutions for what is likely 
> to
> happen rather than fight a tyrannical system that won't let go of old 
> habits.
> Instead the talk seemed to be entirely about establishing resilience and
> organisational structures to weather the storm. By building knowledge 
> groups
> and putting these plans into action we stand a chance of surviving the 
> first
> wave of climate destruction but only if it is not as severe as is 
> predicted by
> all the latest climate models worst case scenarios.
>
> As Graham also stated the rebirth, if you care to call it that, could well
> start in places like Greece. However I would presume that is a rebirth of
> economic standards and conditions as opposed to anything resembling a 
> climate
> solution. I also imagine this was meaning the rebirth will be after 
> society
> has collapsed or have I misunderstood?
>
> But fear not. Mad Max seemed to do okay. :) A little joke to brighten this
> dour subject. Not meant as remotely serious. Honest.
> Regards
> Kev C
>
> On 12/11/2011 17:28, Wright, Steve wrote:
>
> Well Kev,
>
>
>
> Mad max is all very well as a metaphor but frankly, if that is the ethics 
> set
> we are reduced to aspiring to, I think I would rather fry. Of course we 
> can
> easily see how current trends could lead to a mass extinction event but in
> truth, no one actually knows how these extremely complex climate dynamics 
> will
> pan out in practice in terms of time scales. We are left with relative
> probabilities.
>
>
>
> We should aspire to hope. The cataclysms' which may lie in the future are
> likely to come in waves and to be unfairly distributed. Whilst we in the 
> North
> may be spared the worst initially, we are utterly dependent as yet on the
> mammary gland of extended supply chains.
>
>
>
> However, the system is probably more resilient than we think. Batten down 
> the
> hatches if you must but a similar bunker mentality prevailed during times 
> in
> the Eighties when many thought nuclear war was probable. They were indeed
> scary times but the way through was by collective acts of resistance and
> sanity. And that battle remains to be won even though the absolute number 
> of
> warheads has been steadily reducing over the last decade.
>
>
>
> It is what makes Alisdair's points so cogent - we do best when we help 
> each
> other and gradually relinquish the addiction to bourgeois individualism. 
> It is
> important for us to take heart and work together if we are to create a
> cultural transformation by actually transforming. The words of the
> Russell-Einstein manifesto still ring true - "remember your humanity and
> forget the rest." The alternative is to become a rat and we should resist 
> such
> silly reductionism. Lets fuel up on vibrant hope and constantly raise the 
> call
> for a new ethics as if our lives depend on it. There is still time to 
> create a
> new way of thinking - so let us become the ones we have been waiting for.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
> ________________________________
> From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum
> [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on 
> behalf of
> Kevin Coleman 
> [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
> Sent: 12 November 2011 13:53
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Naomi Klein: Climate change, capitalism and the 
> transformation of
> cultural values
>
> Hello All,
> Having been a follower of Naomi Klein for some time now I can say she has 
> a
> good idea of what is really going on in the corporatist world. 
> Unfortunately
> she is not a climate scientist but she is a social observer of repute and 
> has
> for a long time been writing about the real agenda behind all the 
> corporate
> spiel. (Her book Shock Doctrine is worth reading)
>
> As for the future we can wave goodbye to any kind of mitigation of climate
> change. For years I have been asking why the governments don't do anything
> more positive about this dilemma if they are so sure its happening. Why 
> they
> have not made concrete plans to mitigate for carbon emissions and put in 
> place
> plans to install solar PV systems on every property that could produce
> electricity and use that to power the rest of the homes that can't produce 
> it?
> Why have they not done this before now? Why have they decided to cut the 
> feed
> in tariff when it is the quickest, cheapest and simplest way to introduce
> solar PV generation to the public? The reason is simple. It would affect 
> the
> profits of the corporations who are right now hiking prices and gloating 
> at
> the profits they are making. The corporatists Fiddle whiles the planet 
> burns.
> The answer I always came up with for the lack of government will was 
> because
> they were being told that if they did introduce curbs and cuts it would 
> cause
> an economic disaster. It has also become very obvious that governments are
> bought and paid for by the corporatist movements. Just take a look at the
> agenda that Obama has been pushing all along since his election. Tax 
> breaks
> for the very wealthy? How obscene is that when the people cannot even 
> afford
> to eat?
>
> But the truth is the economic disaster they speak of is only limited to 
> the
> corporatists profit margins and not to society as a whole. We could 
> survive
> comfortably but with some major changes to the financial structure of 
> society.
> The people with the money now would soon find themselves struggling to 
> survive
> when most folks would simply turn them away when they proffered bundles of
> money for food. What good will money be in the future world where skills 
> and
> abilities will count for more? If you can't grow your food your
> dead.....unless you can do something else that socie



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4615 - Release Date: 11/13/11