View Full Version : Youth Climate Strike
The kids at our local school district are going on strike this Friday, for Climate Stuff:
https://orcasissues.com/orcas-students-will-join-nationwide-strike-for-the-climate/
The local newspaper article on the topic gave their manifesto, from the "US Youth Climate Strike" organization:
https://www.youthclimatestrikeus.org/platform
There are so many key issues that are being kicked down the road for the future to resolve.
I don’t like it when children are used as political props.
I don’t like it when children are used as political props.
These kids are high school kids, not babies, and they have a real-life young heroine--Greta Thunberg. Is their protesting any different from the protests Baby Boomers were involved in in the 60s?
I'm actually going to a rally in Burlington that day. I hope those young kids let this old fogey protest!
I'm not concerned about the protest - but rather some of the silliness in their platform and demands.
It seems to be a "throw every intersectional issue against the wall" approach.
Yeah, it mirrors the Green New Deal in a way, right? That also has everything but "free ice cream for everyone" in it. I'm not sure it's wise to be so all over the place.
You always start negotiations with some pie in the sky thrown in, and work down from there.
Good for the kids. My siblings demonstrated at that age (and even my mother was drawn in).
You always start negotiations with some pie in the sky thrown in, and work down from there.
The implementation of any measures to curb climate change must be considerate, and actively working against, the impacts of climate change on marginalized communities-- communities of color, impoverished communities, disabled communities, and LGBTQ+ communities-- who are at the frontline of all climate-related disasters.
Really? Are LGBTQ+ communities really at the frontline of all climate-related disasters?
Really? Are LGBTQ+ communities really at the frontline of all climate-related disasters?
Of course they are--to hear some of the more vocal wacko "Christians*" out there, they're the cause of hurricanes, earthquakes, meteor strikes...(there really should be a sarcasm emoji.)
*Not to be confused with sane Christians
The manifesto may have some value, but I think the bigger purpose is public awareness of climate change and that it is the young people who are going to have to deal with the mess they will inherit. I think one big message Greta Thunberg is talking is that global warming is not opinion or politics, but good science.
That climate change is happening is not a matter of politics. What to do about it is a matter of politics.
Seizing on a crisis to demand sweeping new powers for government presents perhaps an irresistible temptation to use those powers to rebuild society to your desired specifications. Hence all the unrelated demands that encrust these manifestos.
These kids are high school kids, not babies, and they have a real-life young heroine--Greta Thunberg. Is their protesting any different from the protests Baby Boomers were involved in in the 60s?
I'm actually going to a rally in Burlington that day. I hope those young kids let this old fogey protest!
The protests of that era were mostly self-organized, homegrown affairs. They didn’t have brand names and the lockstep uniformity we see here. Maybe that’s due to social media and maybe that’s due to a few generations of improvements to political merchandising.
catherine
9-19-19, 10:46am
The protests of that era were mostly self-organized, homegrown affairs. They didn’t have brand names and the lockstep uniformity we see here. Maybe that’s due to social media and maybe that’s due to a few generations of improvements to political merchandising.
Yes, I think that social media has definitely sped things along, but that doesn't make them less homegrown. I'm thinking of Extinction Rebellion which had local roots and spread globally quickly through social media and there are local chapters now all over the world.
And, Extinction Rebellion expressly disallows people from profiting from their branding.
That climate change is happening is not a matter of politics. What to do about it is a matter of politics.
Seizing on a crisis to demand sweeping new powers for government presents perhaps an irresistible temptation to use those powers to rebuild society to your desired specifications. Hence all the unrelated demands that encrust these manifestos.
Maybe if the republicans would actually get involved in the debate, instead of claiming that there isn't a problem, while simultaneously trying to force car companies to make less efficient vehicles and open up any and all public lands for oil drilling, we could have a national debate about this. But for now there are only two choices on the table. All. Or nothing. As someone who hopes to inhabit this planet for another 30-40 years I'll take the all option. And frankly, everything really IS connected. The reason farmers in Brazil are burning down the rainforest responsible for 20% of the earth's conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen is because china now wants to buy food from them because trump is a stupid ass who wants to destroy american agriculture with his trade war.
Seizing on a crisis to demand sweeping new powers for government presents perhaps an irresistible temptation to use those powers to rebuild society to your desired specifications. Hence all the unrelated demands that encrust these manifestos.
You've put your finger on what was bothering me about their overreaching manifesto.
The explicit demand for compulsory education of K-8 students, laying out the reason, was a bit hair-raising.
As was the demand for some sort of tribunal with subpoena powers and so on.
Historically, these sorts of intersectional movements have become less intersectional once they have achieved success, and my kind are often the first against the wall.
ApatheticNoMore
9-19-19, 12:32pm
Yeah, it mirrors the Green New Deal in a way, right? That also has everything but "free ice cream for everyone" in it. I'm not sure it's wise to be so all over the place.
What if not being all over the place DOESN'T WORK. Full stop. Period.
I understand why people who really don't care about the issue as a priority don't care if it works or not. Ultimately it doesn't matter to them at the end of the day. They are more interested that society fit some set mold. That's what they accuse GND advocates of, and it might be true for some, but I think that's mostly projection and is far more their own stance than anything. I would like society to be decent, I want humane policies that goes without saying, but beyond that I want us to work on the environmental crisis as priority, much follows from that, a society we need to get there. This scares people that we have to think outside the box to get there. I don't care.
Because more narrow environmentalism has been tried. I don't think it's bad or anything. I just think like much else it's FAILED (to address the scope of the problem). GND folks are trying to actually learn from things like the Yellow Vests, that was an attempt to punish carbon use, it failed, despite the climate emergency, people would not accept it. That's why people have moved on to "climate justice", even if their main concern was climate. They realize the economics of it all must be addressed, it can't just fall on the most vulnerable, not just because it's unjust although it is, but because it doesn't necessarily work as getting policy implemented. If you want things to work you welcome this type of learning and modifying accordingly.
Now that's economics and climate economic justice, identity politics and stuff, maybe it needs to be addressed, maybe not, I don't know. It's not really my wheel and it's sometimes seems it is used to undermine movements.
Republicans, oh who knows if they ever become a party that cares about environmental issues decades hence (if we have decades), then they might be worth a second look occasionally (though I'm not a Republican). They are worthless right now and not worth any attention except to replace them with people who do give a darn.
Maybe if the republicans would actually get involved in the debate, instead of claiming that there isn't a problem, while simultaneously trying to force car companies to make less efficient vehicles and open up any and all public lands for oil drilling, we could have a national debate about this. But for now there are only two choices on the table. All. Or nothing. As someone who hopes to inhabit this planet for another 30-40 years I'll take the all option. And frankly, everything really IS connected. The reason farmers in Brazil are burning down the rainforest responsible for 20% of the earth's conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen is because china now wants to buy food from them because trump is a stupid ass who wants to destroy american agriculture with his trade war.
The "lungs of the world" figure ignores the impact of respiration that occurs in the Amazon basin, the net oxygen released is nowhere near 20% (https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conservation/2019/08/why-amazon-doesnt-really-produce-20-worlds-oxygen) . If you want to credibly claim the mantle of science as your own, I think you need to be more precise.
The "all or nothing" claim, is also the sort of thing demagogues say to frighten the masses into submission. As if redacting one comma from the Green New Deal spells doom for us all, much less accepting a regime of control by people with an agenda that includes a lot more than climate change.
The "all or nothing" claim, is also the sort of thing demagogues say to frighten the masses into submission. As if redacting one comma from the Green New Deal spells doom for us all, much less accepting a regime of control by people with an agenda that includes a lot more than climate change.
I'm also getting a bit fed up with support of LGBTQ+ folks being hauled out by by various groups as some sort of sign of their wokeness, good intent, progressivism, intersectional credentials or whatnot. It makes me feel like a dancing bear, brought out for party tricks.
And in this case, it's ludicrous.
I’m only saying all or nothing because those are the only choices that seem to be out there currently. If you want another choice get your failed party to actually offer a choice beyond nothing.
If you want another choice get your failed party to actually offer a choice beyond nothing.
I don't have a party.
I'm also getting a bit fed up with support of LGBTQ+ folks being hauled out by by various groups as some sort of sign of their wokeness, good intent, progressivism, intersectional credentials or whatnot. It makes me feel like a dancing bear, brought out for party tricks.
And in this case, it's ludicrous.
On the positive side, you could add “virtue signal” to your resume.
On the positive side, you could add “virtue signal” to your resume.
I already do enough volunteer work, I don't need volunteered without consent :-)
I’m only saying all or nothing because those are the only choices that seem to be out there currently. If you want another choice get your failed party to actually offer a choice beyond nothing.
Which party brought the GND up for a vote in the Senate, and which party took it’s ball and went home?
Which party had no intention of negotiating the gND in the senate. The same party whose leader wants to lower fuel economy standards to please his #3 BFF Saudi Saw Bones and institute oil drilling everywhere all the time and lower clean water standards all over the place.
Like i said, one party is trying to do something positive and the other not only has zero interest in doing so, they are actively trying to weaken the standards that already exist. It’s amazing, and pathetic, to realize that nixon was the last republican politician to care about the environment.
Which party had no intention of negotiating the gND in the senate. The same party whose leader wants to lower fuel economy standards to please his #3 BFF Saudi Saw Bones and institute oil drilling everywhere all the time and lower clean water standards all over the place.
Like i said, one party is trying to do something positive and the other not only has zero interest in doing so, they are actively trying to weaken the standards that already exist. It’s amazing, and pathetic, to realize that nixon was the last republican politician to care about the environment.
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say one party is simply talking about doing something without bringing proposals to a vote; satisfying themselves with trying to paint the other party as pro-doomsday?
Until they take back the senate next year what else would you propose the democrats do? It’s not like mitch mcconnell has any intention whatsoever of working in good faith on climate legislation.
Why not bring it up for debate even if you’re not sure of winning? Wouldn’t it be better to show the public what dreadful people those Republicans are when they vote for human extinction? If the Democratic Party truly represents our salvation as a species, shouldn’t they be willing to fight for it early and often?
I don't think either main party is capable of making any real progress on the issue. They are both owned by the system that created the problem. They'll natter about around the edges, that's about it.
Why not bring it up for debate even if you’re not sure of winning? Wouldn’t it be better to show the public what dreadful people those Republicans are when they vote for human extinction? If the Democratic Party truly represents our salvation as a species, shouldn’t they be willing to fight for it early and often?
Guaranteed of losing (which is the reality of any democratic idea being brought up in the senate) and not sure of winning are two different things. The republicans have made it quite clear over the past decade that they have zero intention of working with democrats on anything and are much more interested in seeing them fail.
Given the certainty of failure in the senate it makes sense to be bringing up the topic regularly everywhere else that it might get people's attention. Who knows, maybe that attention will result in a few republican obstructionists losing elections.
frugal-one
9-19-19, 6:56pm
Why not bring it up for debate even if you’re not sure of winning? Wouldn’t it be better to show the public what dreadful people those Republicans are when they vote for human extinction?
I think the Democrats have already done that.
I think the Democrats have already done that.
Not very effectively, or there would be a lot fewer Republicans.
frugal-one
9-20-19, 12:25pm
Not very effectively, or there would be a lot fewer Republicans.
Was going to make a snarky comment but will pass.
Was going to make a snarky comment but will pass.Well, it's the thought that counts.
Well, it's the thought that counts.
Supposedly prayers count too.
I'd like to think the younger generation can sustain their passion and turn this old listing ship into something new and shiny. Revolutions do happen, and I'm more than ready for one.
Ultralight
9-21-19, 12:01pm
I think that when it comes to ecocide, the ship has sailed.
Let me mix the metaphor. It is all over but the shouting, so I says: Let the kids shout!
I recall being in high school during the first Earth Day (1972?). We had a rally in the auditorium. It seems our generation hasn't helped the situation.
I see there are some arrests being made in DC as protesters block traffic.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.