Enough is Enough

Discussion of books relating to oil, sustainability and everything else talked about here.

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Post Reply
User avatar
biffvernon
Posts: 18538
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Enough is Enough

Post by biffvernon »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ-LYElvtEU

http://steadystate.org/enough-is-enough - Enough Is Enough lays out a visionary but realistic alternative to the perpetual pursuit of economic growth—an economy where the goal is enough, not more. Based on the best-selling book by Rob Dietz and Dan O'Neill, the film explores specific strategies to fix the financial system, reduce inequality, create jobs, and more. Drawing on the expertise of Tim Jackson, Kate Pickett, Andrew Simms, Natalie Bennett, and Ben Dyson, Enough Is Enough is the primer for achieving genuine prosperity and a hopeful future for all.

Enough Is Enough is produced and directed by film-maker Tom Bliss, and includes illustrations by cartoonist Polyp (see http://polyp.org.uk for more), animations by Henry Edmonds, and title graphics by Cassandra Chu. Funding for the film was provided by the Climate and Geohazard Services hub at the University of Leeds, Berrett-Koehler publishers, and the Urbal Institute.
Category
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13584
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

Good film.

The only problem is that it is likely to end up being a case of preaching to the converted. I'd argue that some of the problems we face are simply unsolvable - that it is too late and collapse is inevitable. However, it is also quite clear that at least some of the problems are not only solvable, but the solutions are both known and realistically implementable - transferring the power of banks to create money to a democratically accountable body is a perfect example.

And yet there is no prospect of this actually happening. Why? Because the rich and powerful people who make the decisions have no wish to implement the solutions, because their wealth and power is linked to the system that we're proposing be replaced, and because the majority of the general public who would benefit from the system being changed are simply not interested in engaging with this discussion, watching films like this or applying pressure to get things changed. We can't even get them to take enough interest to sign a damned petition.

Net result: the things we can't fix won't get fixed, and things we could fix won't get fixed either.

:)

Perhaps I could try to be a bit more constructive and ask the following question:

How can we get this message through to a significant proportion of the population, rather than a tiny minority who cannot, on their own, change very much at all?

Next week that article I wrote about Peak Oil and the Transition Town movement will be published in the Hastings Independent - a free local newspaper with a print run of 10,000 copies. How many people do you think will contact Transition Town Hastings in response? 10? I think if it generated 10 responses, I'd be quite happy. That's how far away we are from getting our message through.
Little John

Post by Little John »

Things need to get much worse in practical terms for ordinary people before they will be motivated to act. Therefore, the logic of the above dictates that any strategy to motivate people should involve activists engaging in acts of provocation of the authorities in order to precipitate a severe and sudden clampdown. In turn, provoking an equal and opposite response from the public. In other words, activists need to be agent-provocateurs.

What form such provocations should take I do not know.

I suppose a start, though, is to stop pussy-footing around with the message and start telling it straight in terms of the dangers coming up and of the very hard choices that will soon upon us vis-a-vis resource allocation. In other words, to start contextualizing the ecological message inside an overtly revolutionary political one to ensure that people understand that the necessary political change is not going to come about incrementally and peacefully because such changes are in direct opposition to the interests of the small number of people in the world who currently have our political organizational structures in a stranglehold. It needs to be made clear that this will involve sacrifice and danger and that things are so bad, despite what their immediate circumstances might suggest, that the time is rapidly approaching when they will have nothing left to lose. In short, it's time to get real with people.

Now, of course, in the immediate/short term, such a stark and uncompromising message of danger and sacrifice might well be counterproductive, But, as times get tougher, that message will gain greater traction and will be waiting in the wings for when the people become ready to hear it.. And the time when they become ready is fast approaching. The far right have already cottoned on to this and are busy building their political base. The left needs to get its shit together and catch up or a right-wing "solution" is what we will get.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14823
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

Little John wrote:Things need to get much worse in practical terms for ordinary people before they will be motivated to act.
Yes, a long-time view of mine.

A prime instance: climate change will not be acted upon until people who should do something are directly and adversely affected. Maybe not even then. By then, of course, it'll be too late.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
Post Reply