Recent searches
Search options
1/ Gestern bin ich ja auf dem Weg zur Arbeite irgendwie in so eine Blockade von Klimaaktivist*innen geraten. Ich dachte, heute ist bestimmt wieder was und ich bin mal schlauer und fahre einfach früher los. Irgendwann fuhr dann Polizei mit Blaulicht an mir vorbei und ich dachte: Oh, nich schon wieder. Ich bin dann weitergefahren und hörte Unter den Linden eine Demo. Ich wunderte mich: Demo zu nachtschlafender Zeit? Bin aber schnell weiter. Grad noch rechtzeitig dran vorbei. Und dann doch wieder Blockade! Mit nem Transporter und #LockOn.
2/ Blockade des Hintereingangs des Adlons durch die #LetzteGeneration.
3/ Also der Reihe nach: Ich fuhr da am Adlon vorbei und mir fiel auf, dass da ein paar Aktivist*innen hinter der Absperrung waren. Ich holte die Kamera raus und begann zu fotografieren. Das #Adlon war bewacht und weder die Security noch die Polizei was amused.
#LNG #WorldLNGSummit #LetzteGeneration
.
4/ Nach meinem Kenntnisstand hat eigentlich die gesamte Berliner Polizei Rücken, weshalb sie #Schmerzgriffe einsetzen muss, statt Aktivist*innen zu tragen. So ist jedenfalls immer ihre Aussage. Dieser Polizist war aber total fit oder hat seine Gesundheitsprobleme kurzzeitig vergessen. Er warf jedenfalls mehrere Aktivist*innen und sogar auch einen Security-Mann durch die Gegend.
In der Bildmitte kann man den Mann von 3/ sehen, den er dorthin geworfen hatte.
5/ Menschlicher Intelligenz und künstlicher Intelligenz passieren mitunter Kategoriesierungsfehler. Der um sich werfende Polizist hielt den Security-Mann vom Adlon, der auf 3/ Aktivist*innen daran hindern wollte, den Eingang zu blockieren, auch für einen Aktivisten und warf ihn kurzerhand auf die anderen drauf. Der Secu fiel ungebremst nach hinten und hätte ihn nicht eine Aktivistin abgefangen, wäre er wohl hinten gegen das Geländer geknallt.
6/ Irrtümlich von Polizisten in eine Gruppe von Aktivist*innen der Letzten Generation geworfener Security-Mitarbeiter des Adlons kehrt zurück zum Eingang. Weitere Aktivistin nutzt die Möglichkeit, die Absperrung zu überwinden. Aktivist*innen sind miteinander verklebt und mit dem Boden. Rechts kleben sich welche an. Blockade des Hotels Adlon während des #WorldLNGSummit im Hotel #Adlon, #Berlin, 10.12.2024
7/ Aktivist*innen der #LetzteGeneration haben sich an den Händen miteinander verklebt. Polizisten prüfen, ob sich die Hände lösen lassen.
#Adlon #Berlin #WorldLNGSummit
.
The Germans are going through another phase of climate care. There better be no luck in this neocolonial initiative of yours.
@zlax bro what are you talking about
I appreciate you liked my calendar-wheel diagram years ago, but I really don't appreciate your periodic, bad-faith and ungrounded snarks
talk or stop or block
bro what are you talking about
As a resident of your raw resource colony, i say bluntly: irresponsible promotion of a neo-colonial climate change agenda does you no honour. Sure, it's fashionable and norm for youth in the West, but here, outside your colonial metropolises, this policy threatens living things. The poster above is a demonstration that there is nothing new in your agenda - it is a regular Nazi tradition:
It's a mediocre Western tradition: #^https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_Germany
Moreover, the European Greens, in whose interests your climate promotion works: were founded by real Nazis:
#^https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur_Springmann
#^https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Vogel_(Politiker)
#^https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Mechtersheimer
etc etc
From the outside you are not much different from your ancestors in this matter. You're probably already sincere to genocide, for the sake of ‘your’ ideas (about saving the climate):
#^https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/population-decline-will-change-the-world-for-the-better/
@zlax Look, I am an anarchist. I reject the choice between green prison and liberated wasteland.
I guess you are talking about how the mainstream thinks that green = "green growth", electric cars, etc. In my mind, the global North/West absolutely needs to consume way less and, like you say, stop being the worlds jailers.
Interesting points about the nazi -> Greens history. Not surprising, hope they've distanced themselves, but also: the green party in Germany suck. Pretty sure they're not...
@zlax ...much better elsewhere. (P.s. I am not German?)
In any case: bad people holding an idea does not make that idea bad. Ideas must be talked about on their own merit, not attacked ad hominem, and you are smart enough to know that.
Which bit of the climate "agenda" do you take issues with? (I take issue with the overwhelming focus on CO2, although I think it very serious) Also interested to hear about your climate activism more generally.
Ha ha, I wish I got paid for my posts!!
@zlax so, let this be proof to you that I am not here just to "talk to my own".
If you want to continue please assume a bit more good faith, make less personal assumptions about me (my ideas, my personal history, nationality, etc). Oh, and the nazi refs. You broke Godwin's law, and now I have to mention them too... just don't, unless it is truly, causally relevant.
I am actually a bit curious to know how you went from climate activist, to thinking that a LNG conference is good 
I am actually a bit curious to know how you went from climate activist, to thinking that a LNG conference is good
It may come as a shock to you. I'll tell you how disappointed i am with this agenda: at a secret anarcho-primitivist fest in the woods on the Oka River, i met a veteran of local movement. I used to hear many times about dubious grants (from critics of the climate movement), but i didn't believe it, i thought it was fiction, because i was judging by myself - after all, i was doing everything sincerely, not to make money, but for the sake of the idea. I asked this well-known person in tight circles to see if the critics were wrong..... And he began to be embarrassed, to justify himself, to say that he received almost nothing from this US fund, everything was taken by the main leader. I couldn't even think that this was true, if someone else had told me this about them. And they called themselves anarchists. After that, i began to research the topic with purpose. At a certain point i became familiar with fringe areas of science, which made me completely rethink my ideas about the world based on western mass culture.
The fact is that the modern Western worldview is based on a religious foundation of uniformity, developed in Britain, has prevailed in scientific circles as the ideological basis of the universe. One of its most famous proponents was the parishioner at St Mary's Anglican Church, the Bachelor of Arts and Doctor of Laws Charles Darwin. A century and a half ago, the Theory of Uniformity was only one of the theories, and academic circles were debating its validity and considering alternative theories. In fact, it is not only an important foundation of trying to stop climate change, but also a component of social darwinism.
@zlax Some rich people will always profit from change; some profit from keeping things the way they are. The machinations of (m/b)illionaires is important to understand, but doesn't affect empirical reality.
I feel like you want to make a point, but are avoiding it. The billionaires, paid activism, people having agendas... these are all accessory to the important questions of e.g. does CO2 increase atmospheric energy retention? ...
@zlax ... Is it worth preserving ancient biotopes and rewilding? Etc. If there is a completely different narrative on all this (which you seem to imply) perhaps just link me to it.
Cool about the planting and battery collection. Do you regret doing it now? Interesting to read the article you linked, always illuminating to hear stories from around the world.
... Is it worth preserving ancient biotopes and rewilding?
Of course. But climate change leaders favour chopping down and burying forests because their "decomposition releases CO2":
"Bill Gates and other investors are betting Kodama Systems can reduce carbon dioxide in the air by chopping down and burying trees. Now if only Uncle Sam would get on board with tax credits, too." #^https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2023/07/28/chop-down-forests-to-save-the-planet-maybe-not-as-crazy-as-it-sounds/
Please tell me, do you personally support such cutting and burying forests for the sake of climate consensus and reducing CO2 levels?
Do you adhere to the media climate consensus on this particular issue?
Or are you like a sectarian and heretic on this issue regarding the climate consensus (you believe one thing and don't believe another in the whole climate agenda)?
Etc. If there is a completely different narrative on all this (which you seem to imply) perhaps just link me to it.
Sure: scientists from Princeton University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have published a new study on climate change. The authors conclude that Net Zero, the global movement to divest from fossil fuels and emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, is scientifically unsound and poses a threat to the lives of billions of people.
#^https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/2023-02-23-E-Challenging-Net-Zero-with-Science.pdf
Cool about the planting and battery collection. Do you regret doing it now?
I don't regret it.
Interesting to read the article you linked, always illuminating to hear stories from around the world.
Don't forget that this article is biased and promotional (they don't mention the funding of this group by US founds, they position them as sincere and gratuitous guys).
Some rich people will always profit from change; some profit from keeping things the way they are. The machinations of (m/b)illionaires is important to understand, but doesn't affect empirical reality.
Even if your empirical reality is due to the media controlled by these rich people?
I feel like you want to make a point, but are avoiding it. The billionaires, paid activism, people having agendas... these are all accessory to the important questions of e.g. does CO2 increase atmospheric energy retention? ...
CO2 is the food of plants. As CO2 in the atmosphere increases - the total mass of plants increases. As CO2 decreases - the total green mass decreases:
Nature: Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend #^https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004
NASA: Rising CO2 Levels Greening Earth #^https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOwHT8yS1XI
It's the basics. From this basis arises the agenda of reducing the level of this gas in atmosphere. After all, the more plants, the more food, and the more food, the more population. In the last decade, a Rockefeller-funded institute has developed the sophisticated hoax that promotes the idea that crops harvested at elevated CO2 levels are supposedly less nutritious: #^https://ussr.win/display/5b3f0c60c6eb0137a349005056264835
In recent years, this idea has been actively promoted by Western mass media. The entire climate agenda is a layer cake of deliberate deceptions.
All ‘climate science’ is based on hypotheses and assumptions (people learnt to measure CO2 levels less than 100 years ago, and regular observations of local average temperatures - less than 200), which are presented as axioms and consensual solutions. It is essentially a form of organised religion. I went through it, i genuinely believed in it all, and as a result tacitly endorsed the depopulation of the human population for the sake of nature and species diversity (after losing faith in the climate agenda, i certainly don't think so now)
@zlax I studied chemistry, continue to have an active interest in the "natural sciences" and know a few things about the philosophy of science: I use the word "empirical" in its specific sense.
"CO2 = plant food." Sure, as is NPK & water. But you don't deny that increased CO2 increases solar heat retention, increases ocean acidity and decreases human cognition?
@zlax you bring up the idea of "the climate agenda" being a faith. The exact same argument I aim at "the climate denial agenda" so let's leave it there. There are beliefs and values attached to the perception of facts. Let's talk about those instead of saying their existence is wrong.
For example, it seems you think it would be good for more humans to exist. Why? How many more? What about the rest of life on earth, considering most people on earth want to increase their material wealth?
@zlax the Forbes article: first, I think there is *no* consensus about geoengineering or carbon capture and storage like you say. It could make sense to cut and store wood as described, but unless it was much better argued than in the article, I would say it's a bad idea.
@zlax I get the feeling you are much more sure "the climate agenda" is wrong than I think it is correct; that you think it is more unified, and I think it diverse
Also, if you could reply in one thread, it would make it easier to talk.
"CO2 = plant food." Sure, as is NPK & water. But you don't deny that increased CO2 increases solar heat retention, increases ocean acidity and
I am familiar with this position, but there are alternative views on this. For example, comparing annual anthropogenic emissions to the gas emitted by a single volcano explosion.
decreases human cognition?
Yes, it is known, a number of animal experiments have shown this, that not only does it affect perception but also reproductive functions, in the aspect of the destructive effects of wearing medical masks: #^https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14117 "Possible toxicity of chronic carbon dioxide exposure associated with face mask use, particularly in pregnant women, children and adolescents"
For example, it seems you think it would be good for more humans to exist. Why? How many more?
Different estimates with different predictions of technological development show that between 20 and 300 billion people will be acceptable for Earth. In my opinion we need 10 billion as soon as possible, 10^10: #^https://youtu.be/B1sr9x263LM?t=896 (i am not a supporter of this author and do not recommend watching more than 2 minutes of this video, but he was one of the first to articulate this 10^10 principle of increasing complexity of natural systems).
What about the rest of life on earth, considering most people on earth want to increase their material wealth?
All it takes is a couple of decades and the targeted creation of appropriate media content to raise a generation with low consumption ideals, e.g. along the lines of Juche. That's if the owners of modern media will be changed or they decide to change the modern agenda.
the Forbes article: first, I think there is *no* consensus about geoengineering or carbon capture and storage like you say. It could make sense to cut and store wood as described, but unless it was much better argued than in the article, I would say it's a bad idea.
I'm glad to read that, it means you're not a bigot, you still have some common sense. After all, there are obvious things: like these forests, behind the wood of which there is an unrecognisable biocenosis.
I get the feeling you are much more sure "the climate agenda" is wrong than I think it is correct; that you think it is more unified, and I think it diverse
While i'm talking in general terms about this concept. I can also talk about specifics, if you are interested.
Are you familiar with climate change in the Aral Sea? Please summarise what you know about this topic and afterwards i will likely tell you that it's a hoax and what's behind it.
Also, if you could reply in one thread, it would make it easier to talk.
Sure.
Also, if you could reply in one thread, it would make it easier to talk.
Salut, i tried to answer all your questions honestly and thoroughly. You on the other hand ignored my simple question on the topic to you. Apparently you decided to abandon this thread of communication just when i asked you a question about a specific ‘climate catastrophe’. I confess i have often encountered this before: i call it 'Western supremacy'. For some reason, many Westerners feel entitled to ask a lot of questions to the inhabitants of their colonies, but avoid answering counter-questions. In the spirit: a master does not have to be responsible to his slavs, but not vice versa.
Somehow i got the impression that you are different and willing to be responsible. Was i wrong and you are just a regular follower of the Western European colonial tradition of selective irresponsibility?
@zlax I gave you no promise of response rate.
@zlax it seems you have a sufficiently large prejudice against people living in the north/west that I'm not going to be able to gain your confidence.
@zlax I think it might be better for me to switch medium and do a call, would that be something for you?
I gave you no promise of response rate.
Yes, it is. It is better not to make any promises, but just to be responsible.
it seems you have a sufficiently large prejudice against people living in the north/west that I'm not going to be able to gain your confidence.
As you realise, this prejudice did not grow out of nothing, for example, many of my relatives were killed by Westerners who came here ~80 years ago. Now the Westerners are openly funding another war, only to your joy the slavs are killing each other themselves, you don't even have to participate. This is just from personal experience, but if we mention the traditional colonial exploitation of other peoples... Take Africa for an example: your Western progressive ‘renewable energy’ is built on rare earth fossil resources, for example, cobalt mining for climate concerned Westerners is still done with the active participation of child slave labour: #^https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/01/1152893248/red-cobalt-congo-drc-mining-siddharth-kara
For example, the progressive european recycling of obsolete electronics is done through financial fraud when your technological rubbish is shipped to Ghana: #^https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21010025
"Although Africa generates the least of this waste, the continent has been the dumping ground for e-waste from the developed world. The flow of hazardous waste from the prosperous ‘Global North’ to the impoverished ‘Global South’ is termed “toxic colonialism”." - those are not my words, that's a quote from this academic paper.
But of course, the prejudice is mine, not yours. After all, I'm just some Slav, and you are a progressive Westerner, thinking hard about how to build a better society, but who doesn't think it's necessary to be responsible for your statements. I don't deny my prejudice, but i can justify it in detail, there are reasons for it (above are just isolated examples).
I think it might be better for me to switch medium and do a call, would that be something for you?
Please, before you ask me new and new questions, please answer my question to you beforehand, which you ignored. I perceive such demonstrative irresponsibility as a demonstration of Western supremacy. If i answer your new questions after you ignore mine - by doing so i will accept your hierarchy in which you are the master and i am the slave. I wouldn't want that. So please try to maintain equal and peer-to-peer communication without trying to demonstrate your superiority.
...
Also, if you could reply in one thread, it would make it easier to talk.
(as you can see, here i am asking you to do what you asked me to do earlier: try to treat others as you would like to be treated)
@zlax but I did reply in one thread?
but I did reply in one thread?
You have created three new threads by responding to one comment of mine.
Please, before you ask me new and new questions, please answer my question to you beforehand, which you ignored. I perceive such demonstrative irresponsibility as a demonstration of Western supremacy. If i answer your new questions after you ignore mine - by doing so i will accept your hierarchy in which you are the master and i am the slave. I wouldn't want that. So please try to maintain equal and peer-to-peer communication without trying to demonstrate your superiority.
@zlax no, I wrote three message in one thread. Not so important.
You copy-pasted that whole section, don't do that.
I'm not going answer any of your questions, so long as you hold me accountable for the (very real) crimes of the west.
I'm not going answer any of your questions,
You are a true Westerner, your ancestors would be proud of the way you treat slavs from your colonies: you ask them questions, you get detailed answers, but you don't consider yourself worthy to act reciprocally. This is your inherited privilege: not answering for your words to someone below you in the colonial hierarchy.
so long as you hold me accountable for the (very real) crimes of the west.
I didn't hold you accountable for the (very real) crimes of the West at all, but given your irresponsibility it seems that you have something to hide for some reason. Or is it really just a demonstration of your colonial superiority on your part. In any case, irresponsibility is what you clearly consciously prefer in this case instead of responsibility, this is typical behaviour for Westerners in such situations, rarely is it otherwise.
@zlax so I'm a privileged Westerner. Do you still want to talk?
so I'm a privileged Westerner. Do you still want to talk?
Yes, it's good that you admit it and don't try to deceive. Unlike you, most other Westerners try to hide their inherited colonial privileges.
Please answer my question that i asked you earlier. Please do not remain unresponsible.
@zlax I genuinely don't know which question(s) you are referring to, could you please restate.
And please, leave the side comments.
In any case: bad people holding an idea does not make that idea bad. Ideas must be talked about on their own merit, not attacked ad hominem, and you are smart enough to know that.
I completely agree. It may be that climate change is a good idea for you, but in neocolonialism, it only benefits you, not the majority of the population of this planet. Alexander King's (one of the developers of the concept of sustainable development) book, The First Global Revolution, stated:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill… All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” (p.75)
This ideology is justified to you, but to the majority of the population it is simply destructive.
Which bit of the climate "agenda" do you take issues with?
Probably all of it. It's all based on deception. You know about photosynthesis? Do you, for example, know about climate change in the Aral Sea? If not, i'll show clearly how it demonstrates the failure of the entire climate change agenda with these examples.
Also interested to hear about your climate activism more generally.
I have cloned and planted over 10,000 shrubs and trees in total. I organised the first collection point for used batteries in my region (voluntary, non-profit, years later they started opening up such collection points in big shopping centres). Well these are a couple of specific examples, of course there were other things, including other recycling experiences. All of this was done pro bono, without any grants.