Doesnt matter. These kinds of actions are pretty much our only hope at this stage.
https://www.resilience.org/stories/...s-of-apocalypse-or-the-seven-circles-of-hell/You and I are witnessing the twenty-first century’s great crime: a global holocaust whose first victims have already perished. And I mean holocaust, from Greek holókaustos, translated as “whole” and “burnt” – the whole enormity of life daily sacrificed to flames. That is not hyperbole. Driving this crime is the collapse of the world’s stable climatic and atmospheric systems. Fossil energy economies are doing this. They transform the world into a deathly, suffocating hothouse sabotaging the climate and atmosphere. That’s what they do.
Carbon energy kills 3.5 to 6 million people per year through air pollution alone. Beyond that, this crime is also killing people via extreme hurricanes, wildfires, floods, droughts, and heat waves, expanding the range of deadly diseases like malaria and Lyme, famines, and conflicts like the Syrian civil war. There is good reason to believe these disasters will destabilize geopolitical relationships and lead to world war. Every one of these types of disasters will continue to intensify—that is inevitable at this point.
What is not inevitable is degree of intensity. Quantity of death can still be curtailed; we can prevent billions of deaths, even forestall human extinction. But the tragic fact is that some immense minimum of murder is certain. The body count will exceed those of any crimes that have come before. Monarchs and dictators designed the twentieth century’s vast death; this new crime is perpetrated by a global oligarchy – a hereditary aristocracy – a network of governments ruled by a super-wealthy elite. The most culpable among this elite are members of the oil, gas, and coal industries. Whereas the events of mass destruction wrought in the last century ceased, this new crime will endure for generations, maybe centuries.
I don't think fetishising imprisonment and pushing a martyr complex is a particularly good tactic.Widespread non-violent direct action is the only way now, and without it, violent direct action will come.
Without wishing to go hard Monbiot on you, what even is "nature", though? Do you mean the basically agricultural landscape? Or the tiny patches here and there that aren't actually put to some practical or commercial purpose but which still have a biodiversity that's been drastically altered by humans for thousands of years?You take the vast majority of people out of the modern environment and drop them in nature and you'll notice a positive change...
OK, concur fully with that. A good start would be coping with a rising population by redeveloping our inner cities and building upwards again like we did in the 60s, not outwards with these endless land-hungry exurban non-settlements on greenbelt land.I'll set the bar pretty low and say more or less anywhere you aren't surrounded by concrete and metal at all times. At this point, a park is better than nothing.