Dave Douglass at Kingsnorth "Climate Camp"
Aug 16 2008 08:48
#62
OliverTwister wrote:
After doing some more research I owe Douglass an apology. I disagree with him politically but he was a legitimate miner.
Is there such thing as an illegitimate miner?
Aug 16 2008 11:17
#63
There are several amusing answers to that question.
Aug 16 2008 20:15
#64
hey look there goes refused, mining some green gold
now that's a miner ... too-legit-to-quit
Aug 16 2008 22:34
#65
Quote:
Climate change and the continued burning of fossil fuels are not in the interests of the world-wide working class and therefore libertarian communists and anarchists should oppose them.
I think you're just using "fossil fuel" for pejorative effect here. Coal is a renewable resource, which can be produced in ways that are highly sustainable and actually support wildlife and even have a highly beneficial impact on greenhouse gasses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppicing
... presuming we are talking about an anti-productivist economy in which consumption is reduced to a more utilitarian level and less energy is needed.
Aug 16 2008 22:35
#66
I think nature should be treated as something beyond value, and not as a "resource." Too bad as long as clean air water and unpolluted soil aren't commodities no one in the capitalist world will really care. We are destroying our future for someone else's profit... .
Aug 16 2008 22:57
#67
OliverTwister wrote:
After doing some more research I owe Douglass an apology. I disagree with him politically but he was a legitimate miner.
Fekking Halleluyah:)
Aug 17 2008 00:22
#68
1. As mentioned above, Dave Douglass is retired, and holds no official position with the NUM or any other union
2. Note the spelling of Douglass[b]
3. There was never any counter demonstration against the climate camp even discussed by the IWW- any rumours that have surfaced suggesting there was are purely malicious horse shit spread by one or two people who shall remain nameless.
4. When Dave talks about "clean coal technology", I think he is referring to a raft of measures including CCS, which theoretically reduces emissions by c90%.
5. The crux of the argument is that India and China have (allegedly) agreed to implement this technology, [b]IF IT IS DEVELOPED ELSEWHERE: therefore the development of the technology in the UK will, realistically, reduce emissions as well as protecting the jobs of workers in the coal and energy-producing industries.
Aug 17 2008 00:25
#69
I'll work out how to use this thing, one day.
Aug 17 2008 09:08
#70
edgewaters wrote:
... presuming we are talking about an anti-productivist economy in which consumption is reduced to a more utilitarian level and less energy is needed.
I hope your not suggesting we give up modern technology? If I can't have playstation it's not my revolution 
Aug 17 2008 09:10
#71
Not that I don't think we need to reduce consumption and get energy from more sustainable sources 
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
After doing some more research I owe Douglass an apology. I disagree with him politically but he was a legitimate miner.