Nice, next we just need to turn down the dial on greed, power games etc.

I was there 30yrs ago, but was seen as a crank.

Thanks, a true visionary.

A pity we didn’t all get on board at that point.

I agree with everything you say, short of “ripping the bandaid”. You and I have reached the realisation of the seriousness of the issue. It’s a road to Damascus moment for people who realise this. Unfortunately it is very difficult to explain this, or convey it to people who are just getting along with their lives, or are being lead down another road.

The number of people coming to this realisation is increasing rapidly along with the number of people who realise there is a problem that needs addressing and are ready to act. But there is an enormous inertia in the system and the culture. Many of us are banging our heads against this wall of inertia.

Eventually one realises all we can do is play our part from the position we are in within society. Ideally one would become a politician run for office and change things. Or figure out a way to change peoples minds through some kind of media organisation, or protest group. But again the inertia hits home and many people are already doing these things. In fact some of these people are pushing so hard that media campaigns are growing to discredit them as extremists and pull more people into climate denial.

So one reaches a point of acceptance, an acceptance that the crisis is enormous and irreversible and we as a species are to weak to prevent it. This is quite normal, the list of species extinctions in the fossil record is long and there is an inevitability to it.

The task of intelligent beings as I see it is to overcome these cycles and reach a point of long term survival through working with natural cycles and adopt a custodian role within the ecosystem.

It is too late now to overcome this current cycle of climate change, however if some portion of humanity can survive, adapt and preserve our intellectual and technological achievements sufficiently that they can be conveyed to the next flourishing of civilisation. There is an increased chance of achieving a that custodial role.

This is the natural cycle as I see it, with many failed attempts, collapses, until at some point in the future, the species adapts, or grows up sufficiently to overcome these obstacles and achieves a long term survival and develops into an advanced civilisation to take its place among other advanced civilisations in the cosmos, if they exist (to be confirmed). In this humanity is still in its infancy.

Personally, I will play my small part in improving our lot. While enjoying the life I have built for myself and my family.

Are you saying that the existence of sceptics shows that there are people who are not feeling the impacts of climatic change?

No, I’m accepting that there are always some people who genuinely think the science is wrong. Just like there were people who insisted the world was flat.
Having said that, I don’t remember ever meeting, or hearing of one.

I see through you.

Does that mean that I’m a lounge lizard?

I'm all for education, but we don't have time to educate people in order for them to support solutions to a damn comet on collision course with earth. In such a situation you simply ignore the ignorant and take the necessary action that is needed right now.

Of the people who are sceptical of climate change, or adopt an attitude, or conspiracy theory regarding it. Most are swayed by a political populism which spoon feeds them a populist narrative or conspiracy theory to keep them on board. Some are old and don’t want to change their lifestyle, fewer still are young and don’t want to change their lifestyle. There may be a handful of sceptics who genuinely don’t accept the science. But they will fade away soon as the climactic impacts start to be felt.

These people can be disregarded because even if they do form groups which reach positions of power and influence. The impacts of climate change will change their minds soon enough and industry is already making the required adaptations and changes to address the issue. Albeit a bit late to the game, but there was always going to be a great deal of inertia.

Yikes. Biden stole classified documents and gets off.

Now we know what Trump needs to do to get off the majority of his indictments. Prove he is old and with a poor memory. Better still demonstrate that he is not of sound mind.

A walk in the park.

he could be far better than Biden or he could do something absolutely crazy and start a world war.

Fair enough.

I have on occasion thought he (Trump) could be better than Biden on foreign policy. But it only ever lasts a second or two, until I reflect on his policy on some key geopolitical issues, their incoherence and his megalomania.

The obvious question is what does far better than Biden look like, regardless of who it is we’re talking about?

It’s not just you. I couldn’t find the climate change thread earlier. I went via my comments.

Somehow, I am not totally reassured.

It will give us a bit of breathing space on the climate front. But won’t protect us from civilisation collapse. But I think we’re alright. We will be dead and buried by then.

Don’t worry, here in the U.K. we will be saved by the cold blob.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_blob

That would be Trump.

And what about the “I would be a dictator for one day” comment?

(I’m not looking for an argument, just curious)

Rather, the position climate change should be about at this time in history should be about the strategies and mitigation solutions and how to practically implement them into society in a smart way. Everything else is just pointless and every denier should just be ignored just as much as they ignore the severity of the subject.

Precisely, if civilisation is to survive intact, the priorities should be these. The twin path of reduction in the severity of climate change, the transition to zero carbon asap and the bold strategies of mitigation globally.

This will in itself be a gargantuan task. While not following this course will result in more severe climate change. More radical mitigation. With the added complication of civilisation collapse, initially local collapses, but followed by wider systemic collapse.

Or in other words, we have no choice if we want to preserve the achievements of civilisation, rather than return to the Bronze Age.

The preservation of capitalism would only be where it can help in this task.

I find no virtue in protecting the planet for the planet's sake. I don't care if we lose thousands of polar bears if it means the promotion of human life, the continued promotion of the capitalistic system, and the continued centralization of power in the hands of the United States. I don't believe in equality.

You’ve got that the wrong way round Hanover. The planet will be fine whatever we do. There might not be many people left though.

Yes, I see Israel pulling the U.S. into the region. They will not feel secure until there are more U.S. airbases around them. Their control over the U.S. can be seen in the response to the ICJ acceptance of the plausibility of South Africa’s charge of genocide. Within a few hours the world’s media was flooded with revelations of UNWRA employees being involved in 7th October attack with the response being that the Western power coalition stated that they will withdraw funding of UNWRA.

Israel calls the shots and we follow like a dog on a lead.

I’m not going to pretend I have a clue - but at face value, colonialism.

I don’t think colonialism is appropriate to describe what’s going on here. It’s forced displacement, sanctioned and funded by the state with no concern, or provision for where the displaced people are to go, or how they are to feed themselves. Not only this, but the entire mentality of the oppressors (again state sanctioned) dehumanises the victims and is actively hostile to their human dignity. Their rights as citizens of Palestine, under Israeli control as an apartheid state are disregarded, ignored denied (again state sanctioned).

The story depicted in that tweet is happening all over the West Bank and wholesale in Gaza. It’s accelerating and the oppressors are becoming more vocal and bold in their actions. A humanitarian catastrophe could happen at any time.

This is clearly ethnic cleansing and is open to the charge of genocide. Genocide is a specific charge which must be ruled on by the ICJ before it can be established definitively whether the bar has been reached.

As far as I’m concerned, the primary worry for us is not Palestinians or Jews getting their nation-states (neither are perceived as necessary to people other than them themselves) because we can’t write their history for them, it’s about keeping us as far as possible from WW3. And the dilemma for the US as global hegemonic power remains: how is it possible to deter rivals without escalating or risking an overstretch?

I don’t see much likelihood of this conflict leading to WW3. There are a number of reasons for this conclusion. Primarily that there isn’t a powerful army ready to march and overcome any other significant territory. The likely candidate is presumably Russia, but Russia is struggling to hold onto a small area of land in southern Ukraine. While its fighting age population is being decimated and economically Russia is near collapse.
The U.S. and China will steer well clear of any large scale war. For the U.S. there is a move towards isolationism and focusing on internal problems. Plus they remember how all their previous campaigns, especially in the Middle East, have not gone well. For China, why would they take such a risk when they are going to surpass the U.S. economically and they see the U.S. in decline. Basically, they will inevitably achieve world domination through commerce soon enough.

Who else would agitate for a world war. Or be capable of conducting a large scale war?

What may happen though, is a wider regional war with power brokers conducting proxy wars and more of the Middle East left in ruin and failed states.

I think I just need to leave you in your box.

Take a look at this tweet about a farmer being told to leave his land.

https://x.com/amwogakhalwale/status/1741842955059523653?s=20

Can you tell me what is going on here?

Yes and people who have been campaigning for the end of the oppression of Palestinians have been labelled as anti-Semitic, or smeared with anti-semitism, for decades too.

The smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. is a good example. Many Labour voters were convinced not to vote Labour (2019) because Corbyn was dangerous. Would invite the worlds despots and terrorists into the country.

Interesting piece by a good journalist on the IDF campaign.
https://lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n03/tom-stevenson/rubble-from-bone

I don’t find this image particularly enlightening.

My analogy was to illustrate that the U.S. is the senior party here, not wise, but in the position of a power broker in the Middle East. Israel is perceived by her neighbours as a U.S. outpost in the Middle East. Now Israel is showing highly aggressive behaviour and the U.S. is trying to keep a lid on it. That’s all.
Yes I see the strength of the Jewish lobby in the U.S. and the political sensitivity. It places the administration between a rock and a hard place. They are scared to enrage the lobby while wanting to tell Israel to show restraint. Biden, like Sunak and Starmer in the U.K. and leaders in the EU don’t want to be labelled as anti-Semite. This renders them powerless to stop Netanyahu running riot.

Netanyahu finds himself in the position of having great power, in that he has the backing of the Western powers, who are scared to step out of line. He could singlehanded initiate a wider regional war and draw in the Western powers. He can eliminate the Palestinians, which he has dreamt of for decades and be given cover by the West. Alternatively he could now extend the hand of friendship to the Palestinians and Arab neighbours from this position of great power and bring a period of peace and prosperity to the region.

This also puts Netanyahu in a vulnerable position in his own country. The competing political forces in Israel will be imploring him to go this way, or that. They may already have him in a stranglehold.

Yes Isreal is in the crossroads between East and West, and in antiquity between Africa, Europe and Asia. Between Christendom and Islam. All the more reason for her to become a mediator and broker of peace in the region. Instead the psychological trauma, I fear, of their past won’t allow it. It might in the end drag the Jewish people back into exile.

But this problem may also depend on some implicit assumptions that mislead our understanding of the problem itself.

Yes there is a risk of that, although provided these contradictions are understood one can reach a balanced reading of the situation.

For example I am deeply critical of some foreign policy strategy and choices made by the US (the command and administration working through these crises in partnership). While at the same time would dearly love the international peace and order maintained by US hegemony to continue.
It’s true there is a facade of “a free and fair society for all” while behind the scenes there is a more complex geopolitical struggle going on. In which the rules are bent and the history whitewashed. But what is the alternative?

I often think what a China hegemony might be like. I think there would probably be much less war and more prosperity on the good side, while behind the scenes it could be a 1984 (George Orwell) scenario. We have the example of the reintegration of Hong Kong into China as an example.

Going back to the issue at hand, I see the problem as Israel not abiding by anything reasonable and within the bounds of the US hegemony. Israel is an unruly child of the US, poking their neighbours in the eye and stamping their feet. While the parent (the US) is trying to calm the situation and avoid a row between the parents.

Now we have a contradiction at the heart of the US policy. They want to avoid a war while at the same time thinking strategically how they could have war with Iran, take Iran out. Without upsetting the apple cart, using Israel’s plight as an excuse. Presumably they would whitewash the genocide of the Gazan people, as an unfortunate consequence of bigger goals. More important regional strategic interests and stability.

And it seems to me the Israeli claim for the well-being and return of the hostages is even more valid, and they may very well "rake" for them.

They’ll be raking for them in the soil, for that is all that will be left of Gaza.

Please don’t feel you will be rejected if you bring up eastern philosophy on this site. There are a handful of people here with an interest. I am one of the resident mystics, one might say.

Although if you start a thread, unless you find some like minded people to respond, it often stalls as the majority of posters tend to lose interest.

Yes I see that and agree. There is a situation where the absence of freedom due to obstacles can be challenged. It requires action for there to be an encounter with an obstacle.

For example, someone who meditates seeks to disengage with obstacles. To achieve a state in which he/she is free of obstacles. When they achieve this state they are entirely free of obstacles and no less free than they were before they began meditating. A state of samadhi is entirely free of obstacles.

So stillness is entirely free of obstacles and therefore entirely free.

"There is no such thing as absolute freedom"

That’s quite a claim, if the definition is “absence of obstacles”.

Surely you mean to say, I, or philosophy, can’t conceive of absolute freedom.

Ummm.... just who has crossed the Rubicon? Or have both crossed the Rubicon? :shade:

I mean Israel has now crossed the Rubicon. In the future even if they are able to have good relations with their neighbours, they will always be vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Because their action will spawn many anti-Israel terrorists.

How so?

I did say if the ICJ verdict is genocide and the ethnic cleansing of the people of Palestine people has happened.
I’m thinking in terms of terrorist action. I don’t doubt that eventually the Arab League would be able to reach some sort of peace with Israel. But I think the rubicon has been crossed when it comes to terrorist action.

Israel would be condemned to a future of repeated suicide bombings and other terrorist action. I’m not sure the Israeli people would put up with this, so would become isolated.

A very powerful talk by Chris Hedges. He pulls no punches.

Good speech, sums it up nicely.

All right. I would still add that for both Palestinians and Israelis the problem is not just the idea of being historically wronged and dispossessed but also the pursuit of a political status, that of a nation state (very much a Western idea). And nation state formation has been historically proven to be very bloody, if not genocidal. Besides there is the clash of religious factions that is complicating things from biblical times, so not strictly related to the wrongs that the Jewish people suffered in their recent history or Palestinians suffered from the recent history of the Zionist project.

Yes it’s a very complex situation, but not at all unique and inevitable when territory is invaded/colonised and the existing population expelled and treated as second class citizens, through some form of apartheid.
Indeed there is another similar conflict in Myanmar happening now. In which the Rohingya ethnic minority for example are suffering a brutal ethic cleansing.

I suppose what is different here is that the ethnic cleansing is being carried out and endorsed by Western forces who are bound by human rights protocols and live by, or so they proclaim the morality of free and fair societies. Or in other words by the US via its client state Isreal and fully endorsed by the U.K. the previous colonial power in the region. Following promises and treaties guaranteeing to a degree autonomy and territory to the population now being cleansed. (I realise that the U.K. has done this before in other territories in the 19th century).

So what has gone wrong in this case?

Well there are two sides, attacks have been going on from both sides for decades, so it didn’t start on 7th October. That was just a point of escalation. The situation has become gradually worse over decades in a situation of apartheid rule by one side. So it would seem to me that the blame, or root of this crisis lies in the rule of the ruling side. The ruling side insists always that it is it’s oppressed population which is the root of the problem. Again this narrative is a symptom of what’s wrong in the rule of the ruling side.

This leaves me in the position where there is a crisis caused by a problem in the rule of Israel. What is going on in Israel which finds itself unable to live in peace and deescalate relations with its oppressed population.

One possibility is that apartheid states always fail. But if this is the case, surely the rulers of Israel would have realised by now that their apartheid rule will eventually fail. But rather than realise this, they have just increased the oppression, in a cycle of repeated conflict and greater increases in oppression. Accompanied by a gradually more extreme politics. With extreme meaning less rational and more oppressive.

So in conclusion I reach the point where the entire responsibility for the situation lies in the psyche of the ruling elites in Israel. With a side order of some osmosis with the US.

A failed attempt at nation building perhaps?

One thing we have to remember is that Israel's neighbors are Third World countries, and so is Iran too. They simply don't have the economy to really compete with Israel. That they end up like Iraq or Syria is a far likely possibility than them becoming so powerful to really take on (again) Israel.

But the biggest attack on the US since WW2 was carried out with a camping knife. Yes in terms of conventional weaponry Isreal is far more powerful. But if they are defiant against their neighbours then they will have to be an isolated fortress. A sitting duck bristling with weapons. Any interaction with their neighbours would compromise their security.

Going back to the umbilical chord, is this really what the US wants to be tied to? Especially if the ICJ verdict is that genocide and ethnic cleansing has happened. Look at the power brokers involved, Trump and Netanyahu, Biden is a rational actor in this, but the US political situation is on a precipice and helpless to correct it. Even a civil war may not be far off in the US.

I heard a U.S. general on the radio just yesterday saying that this is our chance to take Iran out. We should go in hard now. Presumably taking their eye off the ball in Ukraine.

I agree that the risk of the Middle East becoming a collection of failed states is high. But then Israel becomes even more isolated and perhaps paranoid (they seem to be paranoid now).

Yes I see this. But I also see an arms race in the Middle East though (on the assumption that Israel continues with the ethnic cleansing and remains defiant). They would become a fortress bristling with weapons. Presumably they would want US bases in Israel too.

I’m not looking to make a formal moral argument, rather to seek a cause for the Israel Palestine conflict. I see the reality of the Jewish Diaspora over the last 2,000yrs or so having to live as immigrants in other countries, exiled from their homeland with no homeland of their own as a possible cause.
There are examples of other ethnic groups where something similar has happened, including the Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli’s after the formation of Israel. I could list these disposed peoples, but I expect you already know.
It is human nature to feel wronged when dispossessed of their home and often they feel resentful, or seek to regain their home. On other occasions they might internalise the trauma and try to live with it, make the best of it. But what if it were to keep happening every few hundred years for 2,000yrs, culminating in the Holocaust. That would inevitably become internalised and cause those people to behave in a different way to peoples who had not been dispossessed. Even to visit what they experienced on some other group.

I see what you were saying now, it was about the US withdrawing their bases from the Middle East. I was thinking more in terms of the US retreating in their support for Israel if there is a wider war.

Anyway, I don’t see a fortress, a defiant Israel feeling secure in the Middle East having ethnically cleansed Palestine. They would be dependent on an umbilical cord to the US and judging by the state of politics in the US at the moment that cord could be severed at some point in the future.

It may be so that in the end the US will have to withdraw like France did from the Sahel.

And Israel too, presumably?

What you are describing is the inevitable result of having an enquiring mind.
Enquiring minds have contemplated this conundrum for millennia and what they came up with are scientific, religious, philosophical and mystical explanations.

Presumably you have already read much of the literature and are enquiring a bit deeper. So what in particular are you looking for an answer to?

Yes, I can’t see a global coalition forming at the moment, although it might not be necessary. A coalition of Middle Eastern leaders might be able to get somewhere.

I don’t hold out much hope though as the US, U.K. and EU are holding the line of supporting the side with overwhelming power. And as you say this is not going to help Israel in the long run.

If Israel fails and even evacuates, the trauma on the Jewish people will compound the previous trauma of exile.

The BRICS grouping is evidence of an alternative to US hegemony. However I doubt it will result in much turmoil. I see us moving into a period of three great powers, or fortresses, the US, the EU and China. Who will cooperate to maintain some stability for their members and close allies. With many failed states struggling outside. With climate change becoming the big crisis on people’s minds.

I'm well aware that this is a problem - perhaps the central problem. Equal rights for Palestinians is not compatible with the idea of a Jewish nation state.

Yes, I agree with your analysis, my pessimism might be slightly greater than yours though.

I come back to the moral argument I laid out a couple of days ago. That the Jewish people have been wronged, exiled for 2,900yrs. The trauma and modification in their culture to adapt to this runs deep.
Somehow they are transferring some of this pain onto the Palestinian people.

Also I refer to my point about the human condition. Human frailty, that we like to think ourselves as moral thinking actors, but so often find ourselves falling back into tribal and survival behaviours which we have evolved in us over millions of years.

In a sense we have reached a pivotal point here in the development of civilisation. Do we finally grow up and act as a global community to help these people out and build a stronger United Nations. Or do we fail again, remain divided, tribal, to sit by and watch the continual spread of failed states across the world.

What’s the failure?

Simply The West can only see barbarians and the Arab world can only see infidels. Your own description of Hamas portrays them as barbarians, understandably. To Hamas Israel are imperial colonisers, understandably.

There is a massive cultural divide which has been there and reinforced for over a thousand years.