[Jan Iwaszkiewicz]

Sorry Jim I have heard, but both extremes do little, we need action we need the generally silent centre to stand. She polarises by assumption of the moral high ground. We do not need polarisation we need cohesion we need to draw together all the uncomfortable bedfellows for the good of this world and all the life on it. Crusaders do feel good about themselves but do not have a blanket history of success.

[Jim Moonan]

X
Jan, You are, of course, right in many respects. But GT does not polarize IMO.The polarization had taken place before her arrival on the scene. I would argue that she galvanizes. She catalyzes. She is not extreme, in my view. She articulates a sense of urgency (not panic -- that is what the clip I linked to is about, in my view: Panic = Urgency.)
Does she ignite the extreme? Yes. but the extremes are by definition tinderboxes that easily ignite. "Now is the time to act" is her urgent (not panicked) message.

I had been luke-warm to her ability to champion/speak to the solutions to the climate emergency. But I keep listening to her (yes, I know there are extreme forces at work trying to manipulate her -- I believe that time will show that she is in fact using them to advance what has been her singular objective: to expose the hypocrisy of the powers-that-be and hold them accountable for their actions. She is a seminal voice.

For now, I'll take Greta's clarion call over the false notes of the political and economic power-elites.

But of course, as you say, the tipping point will come when the silent center stands and says, "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more." Every voice — left, right and center — that champions that effort counts.

But I'm with you... And let the rains fall all over Australia.
x
x

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

Originally Posted by Jan Iwaszkiewicz

Sorry Jim I have heard, but both extremes do little, we need action we need the generally silent centre to stand. She polarises by assumption of the moral high ground. We do not need polarisation we need cohesion we need to draw together all the uncomfortable bedfellows for the good of this world and all the life on it. Crusaders do feel good about themselves but do not have a blanket history of success.

Act immediately and broadly to stop the loss of biodiversity vs do nothing, everything is fine are not two extremes. The kid is no crusader in the sense of the violent certainties that fuel crusades are not present in demands to address the human destruction of so many species. The center rarely acts until the body count builds up and reaches their porch steps. It is ludicrous that this kid's voice is even needed this far into one species wrecking the biomes at breakneck speed. Working together is exactly right. But the left hand taking the toxins out of the river while the right shovels them in is not working together. The facts she presents and the demands are extreme not her position. This will not work out with half measures and a dream of business as usual.

[Jan Iwaszkiewicz]

Hi Jim, she is not galvanising the centre nor is she converting the opposite extreme IMHO. She is being used and I think she wants to be. how can someone that young be immune to the headiness of where she is at, a modern day Joan of Arc We are facing massive problems on many fronts and global warming is a major one but not the only one. Oikophobia is alive and well and hardly solution oriented.

At present a six inch downpour is six inches between the drops.


I think your view a wee bit too simplistic Andrew and it is not something I put forward at all. To change or activate the centre requires a lot more.

Regards

JAN

[Jim Moonan]

x
I am aware of her reputation in some quarters as being "manipulated".

I don't worship the ground she walks on or view her as a savior of the environment. She is just one more cog in the wheel.

I don’t mean to distract this conversation away from the climate events unfolding in Australia. We have thoughtlessly, cruelly, greedily engaged in waging war against the environment for too long and the environment is responding to those attacks by going to war against us, the aggressors. Nature is a living organism that is collectively infinitely more robust than any single living thing and will kill us if it has to to survive.

Jan, Andrew, you both sound convoluted in your thinking about her. Yet both of you are among the most articulate thinkers and writers I know. So why can't I decipher what you are saying? Do you appreciate the contributions of Greta Thonberg or not? She is without doubt being “handled” by others. And I do see your point about using the word “panic” as a descriptor / motivator. “Panic” as a word and an action is problematic. But she used the term in a broader context than the narrow definition inion of the word. I’ve personally “panicked” more than a few times about issues close to me. It (the “panic”) always seems to represent a kind of awakening to reality. It has always led to more reasoned, more rational, more constructive action. It spurs and awakes me to resolution.

I don’t fawn over her or consider her a “leader” or an “expert” in climate / environmental issues. I see her as more of an educational tool for the young. She is an emblematic figure that signals a further awakening of societies to what is happening. But there are other equally / more important fronts where positive change is beginning to take root: increased innovation in green technologies / energy to create green economies, political "green" platforms that have gained traction here in the US (albeit tenuous), etc. etc. Greta Thonberg represents a rather superficial aspect of global environmental awareness that is useful because it is easily digestible to the general public across all cultures. That can only help.
Is she the “brains” behind the solutions to the world’s environmental crises? No.
Is she the child screaming in the room of adult idiots until she is heard? Yes.
Does what she say make sense? Yes.
Does what she represents provide other children with ways to constructively engage? Yes.

She is the child who, annoyingly, won’t go away. She is, in some ways, an apparition of the future. She is herself a victim of nature’s randomness and indifference to its own creation. She suffers from aspergers/ASD which ironically uniquely equips her with the ability to focus relentlessly on a single subject/topic. What better role model can you point to for children to emulate? It we are lucky and if she survives these formative years between childhood and adulthood she may very well turn into a bonafide catalyst in her own right for positive environmental change. Like Malala Yousafzai. She has matured into a real force for change and hope for women around the world suffering from oppression and abuse in so many ways.
Will she and what she stands for make a positive difference going forward? Let's not throw cold water on her. Let's praise her efforts and guard her from being negatively manipulated.
x
x

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

No convolutions here, baby. I think her responses and life choices are entirely reasonable and justifiable. I doubt she is anymore handled than you or Jan or I am. I think focus on her, espeicially critical, is suspicious and telling. I think the center is a fairly meaningless term in regards to the choices before us. We can either radically adjust our attitude toward other species or we can continue to remove them from the planet one by one through our commitment to slef interest and confusion regarding economic growth vs. economic health. I don't see any of it simplistically in the sense that we are now all fully immersed in the very thing we need to adjust in a way that will make solutions complex and hard to parse. The center here, where we must jump across the abyss of our own adjustments and systemic immersion or refuse that jump, is a Yevteschenko leap halfway across the abyss.

I have very little faith that the present state of the species is up to the task. I love many of them anyway and will stay in the game as it unfolds.

[Jan Iwaszkiewicz]

This argument really does not belong here.

We are agreed that change is necessary however we need to look at the nature of mankind to create that change. Emotion can be seemingly and comfortably righteous but is often a blinding factor.

Jim and Andrew if you wish to take this further please open a new thread. We agree on most things but it could be salient to keep that discussion going.

We are facing hopefully the start of the aftermath here although fires are still burning and their containment is totally dependent on the vagaries of weather. Flooding rains in Queensland and heavy downpours to the south and huge hail in Melbourne and we have had a couple of millimetres of rain. We are still in the iron grip of drought, drying dams and no feed and of course another hot spell and we are sitting in the tinderbox.

The emotion dies down and bastardry and inertia begin.

We do not know what extinctions have occurred or what impact unprecedented fires of such intensity have had and will have on flora and fauna. We are guessing at its impact on water quality in the catchments. I have friends suffering from the impact of poor air quality.

There has been a massive outpouring of support and money but little is getting to those who need it human nature rears its ugly head once again. We need cold hard thought not breast beating posture.

How many bleeding hearts fought on the fire lines or rescued the wild life or will be there for the slow processes of repair. The answer my friends is ....

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

I do agree with you on all of that last post, Jan. I responded mostly to post #26 but I see maybe you meant it a bit differently than it read. The internet is a silly place in some ways. I just read so much venom directed at that kid lately I get irritated by it. Yeah, wrong thread place for that. Sorry.

I imagine cold hard thought can come only after the political will is somewhat unified and without the profiteers virus but maybe things are different there. Here, hours after disaster, the toxins are unleashed and the rocking back to sleep begins. The majority of the work of keeping the "order" stable is accomplished by the sheer demands of capital and survival needs that allow very few to throw themselves into anything new or helpful without losing their homes or their ability to feed/care for their loved ones. Again, hopefully it will prove other where you are.