At the forthcoming European Elections, every Labour candidate favours a second referendum and would vote Remain. Add in the sentence handed down to Julian Assange, and it is time to send a message. The way to send that message is by voting for the Brexit Party on 23rd May. And if you happen to live in Peterborough, then it is also by voting for George Galloway on 6th June.
Jeremy Corbyn has opened up the debate on economic and foreign policy for the first time in a generation. Before the summer of 2015, Britain had an unquestionable State ideology in international affairs and in relation to the architecture of the economy. It was occasionally possible to make a small and probably jocular criticism of the Government. But it was effectively forbidden to criticise the State. Corbyn has brought onto the platform the voices of opposition in principle to politically chosen austerity and to wars of political choice.
Nevertheless, Corbyn has overlooked his supporters by appointing his enemies to frontbench and other positions. He has permitted a free vote on Syria. He has whipped an abstention on Trident. He has never brought the arming of the Saudi war in Yemen back to the floor of the House of Commons for another vote. His housing and transport policies go nowhere near far enough. He supports the Government’s indulgence of gender self-identification. He sides with neoliberal capitalism on the issues of drugs and prostitution. He wants a Customs Union with the EU, possibly even at the price of accepting its State Aid rules. He is open to a second referendum on EU membership. He has accepted some of the Government’s baseless and collapsed claims about Salisbury, Amesbury, and Douma.
Corbyn has acted against the social and ethnic cleansing of Labour Haringey, but not to secure justice for the 472 Teaching Assistants in Labour Durham. He has failed to prevent the expulsion of distinguished black activists from the Labour Party on trumped up charges of anti-Semitism. He has failed to defend either Kelvin Hopkins or Chris Williamson. He has walked into the Government’s trap over Donald Trump’s State Visit, a Visit that is being held purely in order to elicit such responses and thus to shore up what would once have been the Conservative Party’s core vote. And he has failed to oppose without compromise any extradition of Assange to anywhere, on any pretext.
So send a message by voting for the Brexit Party. After that, of course it would have been fun to have seen Fiona Onasanya returned at Peterborough. It would have been interesting to have seen the latest incarnation of the SDP make a breakthrough there. I have heard good things about the Labour candidate. But come on. It has to be George Galloway. It just has to be. Already, he is who everyone is talking about. Well, of course he is. He is George Galloway. Put him back into Parliament. Put him into this of all Parliaments. Send a message.
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
No thanks. Farage is ‘controlled opposition’, working for the same people who fund the Tories. Corbyn is the real deal which is why the establishment and their fake journalists are panicking and using any stick they can find to try to beat Corbyn.
Corbyn may once have been but that is now ancient history. Forget him and forget Labour. Otherwise you’ll just be like all the people who thought that this time, voting for Obama (or even Trump) might just possibly make some kind of difference. It won’t. The Labour Party is part of the problem. It is not part of the solution. You might just as well vote Tory as Red Tory.
“Do I contradict myself?
Very well, then, I contradict myself.
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
—Walt Whitman, “Song of Myself”
I heartily agree David.
And twitter has just announced some excellent news: Sir Tony “Baldrick” Robinson is leaving the Labour Party.
Draining the Blairite Swamp. Labour looks more attractive by the day, but sadly Birmingham Yardley’s hideous swamp creature is still to be purged.
I have just sent this mail to George Galloway:
I can hardly remember when that was, but I think that you first entered my life when our rulers were gearing up to the invasion of Iraq. At the time you certainly provided me with many an argument and much of the strength I needed to resist, in my tiny corner of the world. Not that it ended up helping much, but that’s another point. I have to confess that since then I haven’t followed you very regularly (keeping up with the state of the world in several languages takes a good chunk of one’s waking hours), but it could boil down to a simple fact: I cannot remember anyone of your statements I might have disagreed with.
Until now, that is, or so it seems. I have heard you expressing your support for Nigel Farage. And I might have shared it wholeheartedly, especially after he quit his UKIP: also Beppe Grillo, whose opinions — in spite of the occasional Verhofstadt mishap — I value as highly as yours, used to get very well along with Farage. He didn’t, for instance, with Marine Le Pen.
All fine and well if, coincidentally and totally by accident, I hadn’t come across a YouTube video of Farage in a squable with Tajani at the EU Parliament, where both were accusing each other of having a poor knowledge of the history of Europe. There’s no discussion about Tajani’s silliness, but I was aghast when I heard Farage reply that Europe had been liberated from Nazi Germany by… the USA. I mean, I too was brainwashed (sort of) into believing that, but as an grown-up I certainly became aware of the Soviet Union’s more than decisive role. Hasn’t M. Farage heard of this too?
There was worse, though. In that same video, you could hear him complaining about a new “cold war” waged by Brussels against… yes, the USA!!! Excuse me? So when I read some comments pointing to this same US of A being the party being most likely to gain from Britain’s withdrawal from the EU, it makes me wonder what role Farage and his Brexit party may play, willingly or not, in such a scenario. Incidentally, my own relation to Britain is tenuous, to put it mildly, so that from my modest interest in the matter, it doesn’t make much of a difference whether Britain remains or leaves the EU.
As I cannot imagine that you suddenly have become enthusiastic about the USA’s role in our British or European futures, I would sincerely like to hear you opinion about this particular point.
If you like austerity, vote the Brexit Party
But do not be surprised if you end up needing a food bank
If you believe that regulations are bad, vote the Brexit Party
But do not be surprised if the deregulated insulation panels on your flat catch fire
If you like TTIP, vote the Brexit Party
But do not be surprised if you end up eating chlorinated chicken
If you think that toffs are the natural ruling class, vote the Brexit Party
You can then boast that you are represented by the likes of Farage and Annunziata Rees-Mogg
If you believe in socialism give the Tories, the BBC, the Kinder Gentler Tories (the Lib Dems), the Hidden Tories (the Blairites) a lesson
We can and will have socialism in Europe
Crap. Vote Labour for a shafting. Vote Labour to squander opportunity. Vote Labour to have your vote ignored. Vote Labour to be abandoned in favour of the middle class. Vote Labour if you want to talk the talk, but not walk the walk. Vote Labour so Twatson, Phillips and others get all the perks whilst laughing in their sleeves.
If you want more sugar coated right wing shenanigans, then you know whose box to tick.
I’d rather take Farage. On account that he will remove us from the EU.
If you are a Tory or believe in right wing ideas of course you will be opposed to socialism and will not be voting Labour. However, if you claim to be left wing and yet vote for Nigel Farage you are fooling yourself. BREXIT is just the beginning, voting for Farage comes with an entire package.
Backing Nigel Farage means backing a man who believes in privatisation of the NHS. Who has stated that he would prefer the American system of private health insurance companies without any involvement from central government. It means backing a man who having seen his flat tax policies fall flat with the electorate has now dressed up his tax cuts for the rich as easing the burden of taxation to make working people better off.
Backing Nigel Farage also means backing a man who favours Commonwealth immigration, a man who has stated that more black people will be allowed into Britain if we leave the EU and that immigration will become a ‘non-issue’ and backing a man who is adamantly opposed to immigrants from Poland. A man who seems to have forgotten why those Polish plumbers were in Britain in the first place.
Lest we forget it was the Polish scientists who first broke the Enigma code, Polish airmen whose fighter squadron had the highest kill rate in the Battle of Britain, Polish soldiers who died fighting with the British at Monte Cassino and on D-Day. Large numbers of the Polish Armed Forces in the West remained in Britain after the end of the Second World War, yet still had relatives living in Poland. I went to school with some of their children. When Poland joined the EU of course their relatives followed them to Britain, especially as Britain was the one of the few countries that did not take advantage of the transitional arrangements to place restrictions on the free movement of workers from Poland for up to a seven-year period.
Of course newspapers like the Daily Mail that spin their anti-EU, anti-Eastern European, chauvinistic, hate-filled diatribes have always conveniently forgotten to mention Poland’s contribution to Britain’s ‘finest hour’ and also the fact that the proprietor of the Daily Mail at the time, the current proprietor’s great-grandfather, Lord “Hurrah for the Blackshirts” Rothermere, backed Hitler prior to the war, supported his invasion of the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia and encouraged him to invade Romania.
I don’t think Farage is particularly keen on ANY immigration, unless it is for the good of Britain. He is just saying what a lot of people think – there’s been too much uncontrolled immigration and, if anything, the main problem is unskilled people from countries (mostly non-European) who think it is ok to have multiple children. His priority is Brexit, then we can formulate more sensible immigration laws after that.
I have my differences with George Galloway; I was actually acquainted with him well enough for him to give me his new phone number days after The Sun doxed him by publishing his number on the front page. Since then, however, I have often found myself at odds with his words and for having called him out on something on Twitter several years ago, he blocked me – I just checked and I’m still blocked – and I have been roasted on here for not bending the knee to him.
However, There are few people in politics who can speak their minds rather than spout party lines as eloquently as George Galloway and he is the perfect pro-Brexit candidate to counter the trope that everybody who voted to leave the EU is a racist. At the time I am typing, there is nothing but speculation whether he might stand as a Brexit Party candidate but having incurred the wrath of his erstwhile lost Labour followers for daring to declare his backing of Nigel Farage’s new party, it would be a missed opportunity not to capitalise on what George Galloway would bring to the whole Brexit issue. It would also be refreshing not to hear a Scottish voice not droning on about a ‘people’s vote’.
Things changed once the Brexit vote challenges. Blocking the people’s expressed will would be antidemocratic.
I typed “happened”, and somehow (Auocorrect?) that got changed to “challenges”.
Switch it off. We are all literate here 🙂
Damned embarrassing double-negative in the last sentence; sorry.
Looks like it will be Annunziata Rees-Mogg for the Brexit Party so we’ll have to wait and see whether or not George Galloway will do the sensible thing.
I can’t find any reliable updates and the Wikipedia page still has George Galloway standing with no mention of the Brexit Party.
Sir I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability…
I remember George’s old radio show on talk sport when he was perpetually saying the country was largely empty and that a random person just born on the other side of the planet should automatically have the right to come to Britain and immediately be considered as British as a person whose family had been here since before the Norman conquest. I remember his unconstrained celebration of the post-2004 influx from E Europe and his delight that the influx would be unceasing.
Fast forward to the past couple of years and a complete 180 has been performed in plain sight. Suddenly GG is not only receptive to but has claimed as his own the idea that mass immigration and open borders are key elements in a Neo liberal EU masterplan to decisively suppress the cost and power of labour in Western Europe. That they are strategies which would have the approval of Milton Friedman.
I have always admired George and agreed with him on virtually everything, bar his position on Scottish independence, his earlier support for unrestricted immigration, and his naive initial enthusiasm for Barack Obama. However, when an experienced politician totally reverses his lifetime’s perspective on unrestricted immigration in his sixties I sense a shameless, cynical, untrustworthy opportunist.
Not necessarily. People do change their minds. Having gone through much the same transformation as Galloway, I know that we cannot automatically assume the worst.
Me thinks BC that your penuitimate criticism certanly underlines the un-reliability of the latter day highly experienced G.Galloway, the former sane observer of all that is false in the Anglo-American especial relationship, and I can only cite his speech in the USA political assembly as evidence of his former highly observable status in viewing the USA’s craven attitude to honour in any inter-nation partnership?
But just maybe it can be argued that in his dotage that George has lost his self sense of shame, among other failings?
Judging by the reported Local Election results …someone – the electorate – sent Labour and the Tories a message …which was fuck off!
Just a shame that so many of them voted for the loathsome Liberals. Should have just spoiled the ballot paper or stayed sat home.
They couldn’t vote for the Tingers, rejected zio-fascist Robinson, and embraced ‘Others’ and yes, the LibDims …plus a few neolib Greens. I think the message was clear enough. We just need to harness that voter apathy and reject the globalising governers tout court …putting the country under new management. Something which holds almost the volume of terror of letting them carry on with their already succeeded plans to make us politically redundant. Watch today’s UK Column to see that Mark Sedwill is the undeclared King of the Country …and how it was he who got rid of Gav the Chav. Because he was beginning to sound the alarm bells about EU Military Unification – which no one voted for, and no one wants …outside of the neolib/neocon Nomenklatura – headed by the Civil Services and Cabinet Office (both under Sedwill). He is running the ‘May Cell’ …a completely unaccountable politburo of occupation.
Albion is stirring. They realise the main parties are ALL not fit to govern. The ‘powerhouse’ North has been hollowed out and forgotten. The regions and margins, outside of their capitals have been abandoned. It is all about the City, an unequal development that has cost the country £4.5 trillion in the financial curse (SPERI Report). The ensuing political vacuum risks populism, demagoguery, and authoritarianism. Maybe that will galvanise the people to back themselves for once? The whole edifice of hierarchical rule needs rejecting. It also needs a managed transition. The chances of positive outcomes are small. The chances of positive outcomes under the current power-knowledge regime is zero. Interesting times.
You could put up a pig’s bladder on a stick so long as it wasn’t Tory or Labour and people would vote for it.
They have not sent a message to the Libdems, who have become the Remainers Party.
Explanation of Brexit for foreigners [90 secs.]:
Galloway was telling Scots to vote against Independence on the grounds it would keep them in the EU.
Here is George during the indyref, declaring there was no risk of Scots ending up outside the EU if they voted No and that he along “with anyone with brain cells” would be campaigning to Remain in the EU when there is to be a UK vote on that.
Galloway is from Dundee, he used to say he supported both Dundee United as a local team and Celtic as their big team, which is a common thing among Dundonian Catholics, but then when he was aiming for a seat in Glasgow he participated in the commentry for Dundee Utd vs Celtic game (2015 League Cup final I think) where he spoke as a Celtic fan exclusively.
While I agree with Galloway on a number of foreign policy issues, I disagree with his stance on Scottish independence, his loyalty to Britishness and I don’t trust him nor his sectarian Hibernianism and how he exploits it and adapts it to UK Muslims. His latest Brexit Party stunt looks like opportunism mixed with the worst of Galloway’s Hibernian loyalty (the idea the British establishment is the best representation for people in Britain).
Ah, glad someone else has noticed. It is a real shame because he is a rare powerful voice of truth on many issues.
When he first campaigned in Glasgow in 1992, he simply focussed on the students in Hillhead, 99% of whom just wanted a bigger grant.
The point at which Jeremy Corbyn let me down was during the HoC exchanges immediately after ‘Salisbury’. May had just declared the Russians guilty. Corbyn asked all the right questions of the PM regarding the questionable ‘evidence’ of guilt, raising scientific and historical anomalies about Novichok, about liaising with the Russians etc. Very relevant questions which demanded specific, objective replies. At that point I thought ” Good for you, mate. Exactly. You’ve got her on the back foot now.”
But no. May’s short response was to throw back her head cackling mockingly (from the Hillary Clinton school of acting) and to curtly reply to the effect of ‘We know the Russians did it so there’s nothing more to be said’.
And that was it. No come back from Corbyn and to my knowledge he never publicly raised those valid and pertinent issues again. And ever since then he has gone completely downhill in my estimation for all the reasons outlined in the above article. He has the annoying habit of making the right noises to start with but then failing to sustain his position and indeed retreating to the point of falling into line with the Tories. I just don’t get it.
Now Chris Williamson…he’s someone who speaks with sense, intelligence, integrity and humanity but seems to be regarded as a pariah and loose cannon within the Labour Party and the msm. In view of his opinions and the way he has been let down personally by the Labour Party he would be well advised to forgo his misguided sense of loyalty in the hope that the Labour Party will come good, and join the Brexit Party. Some of us have now reached that point.
Agree with much this article and your comments but am a remainer. That said I also believe in democracy and the country voted in a referendum and the result must stand. With regard the Novichok hoax, Corbyn did one better and requested the Magnitsky Act be applied(only ever applied against Russia). As for Fiona Onasanya, it would not be fun to have her back in Peterborough after her conviction but much as I like George Galloway, I will refrain from voting him in if he is still sharing jokes with the racist and lying Farage. The traitorous way Williamson and other Labour Party Members have been ditched and shunned is a disgrace, the only anti-semitism proliferating in profusion is that applied towards non Zionist Jews or not pro Israeli Jews, by those same factions, who have shown themselves to be bigots. The only good outcome of a Brexit is that under EU Law, McDonnells fiscal plan would finally be able to implement a NIB should Labour instigate their intended PQE. IMHO Corbyn should have refused May’s egregious request to discuss Brexit and the many Labour Party Members who voted leave will blame him for whatever deal the parties get agreed. I don’t see Corbyn surviving much longer.
Agree with all you say, with one proviso. Corbyn has been under unbelievable pressure from the Blairite Backstabber Scum like “I Am A Proud Zionist” Watson, Thornberry, hysterical homo Soros-funded Bradshaw, Bryant, Benn, Phillips, Ellman, the list is endless. They make up 85% of the PLP and most of the Shadow Cabinet. It is little short of miraculous that he survived two assassination attempts at all. Before the last election, he faced 14 pages of wall to wall smears from the excremental Daily Mail/ Jezza is a communist spy/ terrorist/ anti semite/ delete as appropriate. His big mistake was to try to appease the Board of Deputies and the Friends of Israel. His heart is in the right place, but like Sanders in the US (or even Trump) the Deep State simply won’t allow him to deviate one iota from their agenda.
The lesson to draw from all this is that you simply have to give up on the Labour Party, in the same way people have long since given up on the Fraudian. However you look at it, the Labour Party is part of the problem. It cannot ever be looked at as part of the solution.
It will be good to see old George back in the saddle. Imagine if he had still been in Parliament for the past few years, and the contribution he could have made at the time of the bank bail outs, austerity, Skripal, Syria, the Syrian gas hoaxes, Brexit.
“Imagine if he had still been in Parliament for the past few years, and the contribution he could have made at the time of the bank bail outs, austerity, Skripal, Syria, the Syrian gas hoaxes, Brexit.”
The media would, of course, have slaughtered him, brought up certain allegations, or, failing those two things, done everything they could to ignore him, with the inevitable result that people would no longer even know who he is.
The owners of the media are still our main enemy. Not the EU, not Trump, not May, not the Pentagon.
They’ve tried before and failed. Forged documents from Iraq, Fake Sheikh. He’s sued them every time and won about £5 million in damages.
No dispute with your facts at all. But do his £5 million actually change anything?
I love his outspokenness, but the media don’t appear to have any difficulty in ignoring it, and that is what I consider to be a great impediment to our efforts to get the real facts out there.
As always Mark, I agree 100% with you.
It still is effectively forbidden to criticise the state — the state of Israel.
Vote for Farridge?
While he was a MEP he voted to protect rapists and rich tax dodgers.
No one like facts here?
Is David OK? I think he might have been cloned, or someone might have stolen his identity to write this article. Someone very much more aligned with my political views on JC …someone who could have almost been me.
I would have added that JC is the chosen one to lead the 4th ‘green industrial revolution’ …the surefire via dolorosa to extinction …which is an EU wide policy – and a UK ‘climate emergency’ since Wednesday. The climate has even become an ancillary Brexit issue.
I’m not in Peterborough, but, what the heck – vote Galloway …for shits and giggles.
Otherwise, voting for the practico-inert EU Parliament – which is a mock election in a simulated democracy – is totally and utterly a waste of time. Time and energy that could be spent resisting the ‘climate emergency’: which intends to enact a disastrous course of energy sink infrastructure-led action that will destroy our economy, at the very least. And if we are the ‘world leading Parliamentary’ climate activists …Lord help us!
If we follow Corbyn and Selwyn Gummer’s lead on massively capitalised climate mitigation – as laid out in the Committee on Climate Change policy guide published yesterday – and attempt to roll these policies out globally …we will foreclose the future for humanity – and a great many other biotic lifeforms – with no chance to switch to a plan B. The decisions we make in the next few months and years decides the fate of humanity, with no reprieve.
Which makes the sham democracy EU elections look like the distractory electoral spectacle farce they will be. If you want to send Labour a message, tell them not to kill the children – in a cynical globalist agenda of counterfeit action …rhetorically dressed up as policies to save the children. Endorsed by the cynically ‘green new deal’ Machiavelli manipulated ‘Climate Striker’ children.
There can be no decarbonisation without decapitalisation. If we want to save the planet and each other – we have to divest from neoliberal globalist political polyarchy – the illusion of binary or multiple choice – and go it alone. It is humanity versus capitalised statist insanity from now on. We cannot afford to get it the ‘wrong shade of green’ …as we only have one shot. Make it count.
OMG Big B, there must be something in the air, I find myself in agreement with you again..
Perhaps you can explain why there is such a panic about global warming? It isn’t as if the earth hasn’t been here before?
The climate change hoax’s sole purpose is to defraud the public. The ”carbon tax” scheme is also part of this elaborate scam. It seems that big corporations want to control everything from the air we breathe to what we think; they want to recreate reality and will use whatever fraudulent method they have to employ to achieve this goal.
“It is of course, the global warming scam, with (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”
“Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club.”
I don’t want to destroy our new found friendship: but first of all, global warming is no hoax. But there is no need to get hooked up on that contentious issue. It is one aspect of a convergent Human Impact crisis – which involves our combined impact on the planet (overpopulation is a globalist myth too. It is not that there is not a population overshoot – it is just that at least 80% use no energy and emit no GHGs); overconsumption (by 20% of the population – the top 10% ‘super-emitters’ accounting for 50% emissions) breaching six of nine of the planets boundaries; the ‘debt hangover’ from the Great Financial Crash (GFC 1 – 08/09); and the hidden variable – entropy.
I’ll leave out state fascism for now – but that will tend to increase exponentially in response to economic stagnation.
The net combined effect of these vortices has been the ‘secular stagnation’, ‘long depression’, or ‘lost decade’ to date. Nearly all the recovery has been ‘dead cat bouncing’ cosmetic GDP, stock market, and financialised derivative ‘growth’ – very little of which has been in tangible assets …and nearly all has been increasingly unserviceable debt – expanding exponentially beyond the ability, not just to repay, but even to pay the also exponential compounding interest on (debt servicing). I won’t bother with details, but corporations are selling assets to repay debts. Or moving debts ‘off balance sheet’ to cover themselves.
The hidden variable is entropy. I won’t bother with detail, except to note that it will act as a catalysis – depressing global markets in conjunction with debt. In contracting ‘entropic Bear’ global markets – the ability to service debt is exacerbated by this unseen exponential variable …leading to ‘debt inertia’ or ‘Minsky moment’ when the debts become unserviceable. Which means an unavoidable GFC 2.
So, neoliberalism is kinda stuffed. What do they do? There is a range of options, of which keep going and hope seems to be favourite. As it was in 07/08. Neoliberalism has no way of accounting for its own ‘moral hazard’, as we found out. Mark Carnage only yesterday was telling us if the recovery continues, we can expect rate rises later this year. That is one seriously deluded dude, but that is his job (market confidence – one fat finger trade and we are done), but you knew that.
Another option is what David Harvey calls the spatial fix (spatiotemporal fix) – which works hand-in-hand with the techno fix. This means bringing the previously exterior space in – interiorising it. Bombing a new country into free market democracy …or, in this case, buying up nature. To do that, they need a cover story to sell us on the consensus. No one can argue against saving the planet, fighting climate change, righting all the climate wrongs, and handing on a newly stewarded planet, saving the children, the baby turtles, and orphaned orang-outangs all at the same time …can they?
But they, we, must resist. They do not give a flying fuck about the climate, etc. It is all a cynical marketing ploy to end neoliberal secular stagnation …and give impetus to a new wave of ‘green’ globalisaton. Unlocking $100 trillion of the already robbed pension and welfare pot – for a good cause.
The thing is, we do need to act. But if we follow the plan as laid out, well, it will do just the opposite of saving the planet. As Cory Morningstar has revealed.
If you can see where I am coming from, no need to agree on every detail. There is a need to raise the awareness …maybe you could link to this piece if you want? For the future… so that we can have one.
When I was younger, “all the scientific evidence” said that we were on the verge of a new Ice Age. You”d have to fight off marauding polar bears and packs of timber wolves whenever you went out to post a letter or get a pint of milk.
Now we have 12 years left, apparently, before we are all fried to a crisp. Still, it’s a relief to know we don’t have to worry about the wolves and polar bears any more. Can sleep a bit easier now.
Whatever happens due to the vortex of debt-deflation and entropy will affect all of us. People will die, and it will be brutal. There is probably little chance of avoidance given the recent indications that QE credit stimulus and ZIRPs are permanent. There is even talk of rate cuts from the Fed, which will be fatally contradictory to any real recovery.
Projections for AGW are based on exponential increase of the world economy throughout the 21st century. At some point on the projection, we will reach the tipping point into CAGW. Assuming that we have not sequestered enough energy in the oceans to precipitate this – which is not a safe assumption to make – the scenarios of CAGW are bunk …based on the false input hypothesis of exponential growth.
There is no reason for complacency: other tipping points have been, or are being reached. Land usage change and loss of biodiversity are the big ones. Who knows what the effects of geochemical runoffs will be on the ocean ‘dead zones’. If we disrupt the natural algal cycles that produce most of our oxygen …
There are a lot of ‘ifs, buts, and maybes’ …and some speculative modelling going on. The real truth is that no one really knows what the Human Impact crisis is… or its ramifications. But is safe to assume that they are not beneficial. There are any number of unforeseeable and unpredictable scenarios of the various individual crises interacting. We probably won’t see it coming.
Isolating the broad spectrum of crises – we may or may not face – and looking at them out of the interactive global systemic context …is likely to lead to a false sense of security. The climate is perhaps not our most pressing problem …debt, entropy, and falling standards of living – leading to a polarised inequalty never known in history – is our major concern. But if we ignore entropy, and pour debt into climate mitigation, we catalyse debt inertia and collapse. All these factors are integral to human, interspecies, and life commons survival. The thing about polar bears and timber wolves is that there will not be any. The last few will become a tradable status commodity and looted wealth store – like a rare Modigliani …on display in a corporate captured life preservation facility …for the children. I seriously hope I am gone by then, unfortunately, I might not be.
Whether it’s hot or cold, dry or wet, every storm, gale, drought, flood, whether temperatures rise, fall, or stay the same, it’s all “global warming.”
If only I could get the bookies to take a bet on that basis.
I’m with Mark/Maggie on this one. Anthropogenic global warming is a con. I could launch into an explanation here, but any reader would be better off looking at the enormous quantity of scientific research that invalidates it. This is the best short-ish compendium I know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFOGUrNsadM
If you read what I said, it makes virtually no difference. Debts and entropy are real, and will probably combine against us before AGW becomes our primary problem. I said probably. No one knows. The admonition that AGW is a hoax, is as much of a hoax as anything else. No one can claim we do not know, and use that as a primary case to say the we know. That is the twisted contrarian logic Judith Curry employs. Especially if the argument is that it is a hoax, let’s carry on regardless – that can lead to serious delusion. Our modernity is killing us, and it is coming to the end of its lifecycle – or deathcycle – due to entropy and depletion. There is literally no argument against this, except antirealism. Entropy is quantifiable as EROI, and the science is irrefutable – unlike AGW. AGW is an anti-dialogic …pointless and worthless to get embroiled in. The dominant hegemony of neoliberal globalism is anti-life, and in its death throes. It really doesn’t matter what people think of AGW any more. There are so many potential crises heading our way, due to our modernity disease …we can’t dodge them all. A new paradigm and new humanist way of life is required. The current dream imaginary is about to eject all dreamers as our biophysical bottleneck gets tighter. We will have to face the desolation we are causing – AGW or no AGW. The synopsis is the same either way.
You seem to be implying that it is not worthwhile to examine the minutiae of any argument, but this is a fundamentally unscientific proposition. Frameworks are composed of details, and it is only through paying attention to the validity of the details that we can determine the accuracy of the overall impression. That is how knowledge progresses – through invalidating faulty details, one at a time.
I said nothing about your comments about debt, but this did not mean that I consider that debt is unimportant; far from it. I was simply choosing not to focus on that aspect of your argument.
As for whether AGW is a hoax, or whether the assertion of AGW is a hoax in itself, the same principle outlined above applies. The definition of ‘hoax’ is ‘a falsehood deliberately masquerading as the truth’, according to Wikipedia. Thus the application of the word ‘hoax’ to AGW is appropriate when the only evidence for it is demonstrably fabricated, politically motivated, and/or the result of wholly unreliable computer simulation – which it is. Conversely arguments that AGW is a hoax are not in themselves hoaxes, as they use scientific evidence to refute the original hoax. Only in a twisted universe could attempts to establish an accurate picture of the world be described as a ‘hoax’.
Lastly, arguments that refuting AGW are somehow irrelevant completely miss the point that the powerful use fake narratives to push a covert agenda. We owe it to ourselves to destroy these fake narratives, before they are used to destroy us.
The counterargument is simple: there is powerful and incontrovertible evidence that the Koch brothers and Exxon, for instance, used substantial amounts of dark money to fund climate contrarians and deliberately obfuscate the truth. There are ongoing courtcases. So there are two fake narratives to destroy.
Meanwhile, neoliberal globalism and materialistic monomania are killing us. There really is little doubt about it. The minutiae of AGW are lost in this dialectic. So you destroy the fake narrative. One down, a thousand to go. Meanwhile, the world dies.
Have you heard the parable of the poisoned arrow? It works just as well with reductive scientific speculation, as it does for metaphysical speculation. If you are shot by a poisoned arrow, it is not necessary to know who shot it, where they were born, etc. All you need is the antidote to your poison.
Surely by now, everyone knows that the world crises are all intercausal? It is not a diagnosis we need, but a remedy …a path to liberation. It is the big interactive picture of the world systems ecology that is cumulatively killing all life on earth. AGW is not isolatable from the interactive dynamics of neoliberal modernity. The carbon majors are the big 8 oil companies (including the ones who fund contrarianism); the world runs as an energy economy – not a finacial one; money is oil on a one to one ratio; money (capital) accumulation is structurally expressed as imperialism, racism, materialism, and militarism; each of these is a function of oil; oil drives economic and ecological degradation and terrorism; oil drives entropy which drives debt; oil drives dialectical materialism …which drives dehumanisation; dehumanisation drives accumulation; which drives imperialism, racism, etc.
We have been poisoned by oil. Oil is entropic, subject to depletion and degrading quality. Hidden entropy drives economic stagnation. The short term cure for secular stagnation is QE credit stimulus, ZIRPs, and insurmountable debt. It is all connected. Liberation is from the ersatz prosperity as a function of oil. There is a hidden twist, the oil is depleting and limited. The amount of proven reserves took a big hit the other day. Aramco have been over-reporting their extraction rate. Which means there is less of the good stuff than anyone previously thought.
AGW makes little difference to the big picture. We have to end our addiction to oil, for no other reason than in less than forty years – there will not be sufficient oil to carry out the deathcycle. In truth, we already past the point were oil became an economic debt-deflationary drag. We’ve been debt-funding it for years, kicking a multi-trillion can down the road. The solution to all the worlds problems is a properly managed divesting from oil. Which will also cut GHG emissions. Simples.
Your “oil addiction” is a fake boogeyman: fossil fuels are greening the planet. A well referenced article:
For about 30 years.
We’ve had this conversation before. You don’t like entropy. You read some books. You switched off entropy in your head. You feel a lot better. Sorry to breakup your overcompensation strategy: but it is called denial, John …denial.
Meanwhile, in the real world – entropy exists …as real as gravity – and just as susceptible to imaginary shutdown. So what about greening? Chopping down primary forests and replacing them with palm oil plantations, crops and weeds is not greening. Not for the rape of biodiversity. It’s destroying, not saving, the planet. Peak soil and nitrogen eutrophication are real too. Hypoxic dead zones are real. If we manage to disrupt the oceans algal cycles that produce much of our O2, its curtains mate. For most biotic lifeforms. Including me and you. Pretending it is not happening is not a survival strategy.
As for oil: it is inextricably linked to everything we do. Virtually everything – including food – has a hidden energy content, and a part of that will be oil based transportation …or do you deny that too? Industrial civilisation without oil is a mediaeval neo-agrarian debt peonage. For the links to history: you will find no better than Auzanneau’s ‘Oil, Power, and War’. For the links to the biophysical energy economy, there is no better than Hall and Klitgaard’s “Energy and the Wealth of Nations”.
For the record: human productivity AND human ingenuity are directly related to oil. No oil, no progress. At 40 years a barrel, there will be plenty of work to do. No payment, but full employment …that’s progress.
But you are not interested, are you, John? Whatever you have convinced yourself of – entropy exists. It continues to exist whether you believe in it or not …damned inconvenient, I know. Analysis without entropy is antirealism. Antirealism can produce no insight whatsoever. You have continually denied mine: what about your negentropic analysis? We just burn, baby, burn, and watch the world get greener …and everyone gets to live in a eurocentric highly materialised negentropic techno-theological thought bubble like you? Magic unicorn dreamworlds are not real. Wake up and smell the burning oil.
You failed, as usual, to address as single word to the paper I posted.
It shows that CO2 is plant food, has been greening the planet 30 years.
The epic fail is humanities …there are no isolated facts. Everything is dynamically interactive. If you want to look at things in isolation, you’ll end up with the world you’ve got.
BTW: forgot to add that CO2 fertilisation has an upper limit. Then it is back to warming the atmosphere.
BTW2: Tim Ball is a known moron. Tell him to write a paper for review …not on gardening.
You are aware he openly admitted falsifying his credentials in a libel case. One he dropped in the face of the fact that he never had a career in climatology to be libelled. Absolute moron and nonentity.
The scientific method: like water in the desert.
Alas, too true….
It’s easy to snipe: but what is your analysis? What are your survival strategies? Or do we not have to worry? Do I really have to point out the unquantifiable human suffering that humanity has inflicted on itself. For the sole benefit of a few billionaires. Is depletion, dehumanisation, human and interspecies suffering real? How does our oil based lifestyle impact on that? Whatever anyone says: our modern lifestyle is time-limited by the Laws of Thermodynamics. Similarly, there are limits to progress and prosperity. Limits too to techno-scientific innovation. Early progress is cheap and resource light. Later on, where we are now – innovation and techno-fixes are subject to the law of diminishing returns. A lot of energy and resources for relatively little ROI. Complexity is exactly the same. Fresh innovation – the 4th green industrial revolution – are subject to the Jevons Paradox …leading to an overall increase, not a decrease, in bio-energetic consumption. So what is your assessment of the current situation: and where do we go from here? I look forward to your reply.
You may be interested in climatologist Dr. Tim Ball.
His great little book reveals the CAGW scare for the social control fraud & money grab it is. Only 121 pages.
Details in the comments section of this mediocre article:
Let me know what you think, please.
That certainly raises the point that we modern humans do tend to think in years and decades when contemplating nature, instead of the more rational and scientific idea of considering centuries, millennia and aeons where catastrophic global change is concerned.
That said, I live far enough north to have borne witness over thirty years to some VERY dramatic changes in the glacial landscape and the snowline – enough to have forced some people to change their farming habits – but of course those thirty years are also nothing on the larger scale of world climate.
Every scientist who wants funding for anything or who wants anything published or who wants tenure first has to bow the knee to the great global warming hoax. The smug synthetic Thurnberg brat is a media construct exactly like Syrian Baana.
Yes vote for Galloway the ‘left’ leaning candidate, who refers to head the largest parasitical family on the planet as, ‘her majesty’ we will never progress whilst we have these scroungers, he also refers to the head of the catholic church as ‘the holy father’ when in reality he’s another human being who’s no better than anyone else.
Well that has certainly divided our opinion on Galloway…
Vote Galloway if he’ll vote Bexit !!!!!
ALL lesser evils we can sort after.
George announced his candidacy at the ‘Imperialism on trial’ / ‘Free Julian Assange’ event at Bloomsbury Bapstist church – from 6:15.
It was an encouraging moments in what has otherwise been a miserable few days.
Sometimes it feels like he is one of the few politicians who really cares about important principles (other than the principle of self-enrichment, of course).
The Brits need to get out of the EU.
Remember Gavin Williamson, one time Defense Chief? He said that once out, they can have many naval bases in the Pacific again – upon which the Chinese stopped trade negotiations.
Send your young to the Pacific like in the golden days under Victoria. Instead of creating an opium war, they can create a Huawei war. That’s the world!!!
Yes, we need to get out of the CorporaFascist Anti-Democratic Globalist EU.
We can sort ALL smaller evils after.
Gavin Williamson should go back to selling fireplaces: we can’t afford to pay the pensions of about 3.5 million WASPI women, my wife included, but we need Pacific naval bases !!!!!
From what padded rooms do they release these loons?