|
Re: Planetary Magna Carta
The IPCC Report, even in its homeopathically weakened state, makes it painfully clear. Antonio Guterres, addressing himself to it today, made it horribly clear...that planetary disaster looms because of us. The UN must lead with a Magna Carta for The Planet. Surely, a coalition drawn from science and law could achieve this within 12 months. Could we work in this? Malcolm Dyer
On Sun, 3 Apr 2022, 15:11 Janet Blair, <janannblair@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Planetary Magna Carta
Yes Malcom, until the core group on the BPC list gets to a
critical size, we have not had much discussion on this list.
Don Chisholm: Engineering
Technologist 613
476 1700
On 2022-04-04 9:16 a.m., Steve Kurtz
wrote:
Hi Malcolm,
|
|
|
|
Re: Planetary Magna Carta
Steve Kurtz
Hi Malcolm,
There is an affiliated discussion list which is far more active than BPC. See: https://groups.io/g/gaiapc There is instruction on subscribing, and we'd welcome you. FYI, both Bill Rees (developer of the Ecological Footprint) and Rex Weyler (co-founder of Greenpeace) are members. We even have another Brit: a retired Phd chemist. You can email me if preferred, and I'll send an invitation: kurtzs@ ncf.ca Steve
|
|
|
|
Planetary Magna Carta
The World needs direction. We're headed for the 'Big Cliff' & when we fall it's gonna hurt. 1945, Germany in ruins ...their 'Big Experiment', proved wanting. But, we got a new 'League of Nations' with a nice new catchy name .. and a new Charter. Only gave rights to humans though. Guess, it's time to think same legal rights for all Nature. A Charter for Nature? Nuts or what? Malcolm Dyer, Romney Marsh, Kent.
|
|
|
|
Re: [gaiapc] Analysis of the 2020 HDR
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:39 AM, Don Chisholm wrote:
I think that BPG (Blue Planet Governance) should be in the top RT corner,That is where I would put BPG. So given that the Federation of Watersheds is outside or barely on the edge of what normal educated people find thinkable, I'd put BPG within humanity's current Overton window, if near the edge. So, compared to MAHB, is BPG further upper right or to the left, up, or below?
|
|
|
|
Re: [gaiapc] Analysis of the 2020 HDR
Steve Kurtz
The UFoWoE appears to be Eric’s sci-fi creation. Note the date of the Constitution is 2087!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
As to money creation, it is briefly addressed. I’m unsure of the intended details and exclusivity of it. As to omissions, the glaring one is the permissible number of citizens/occupants in total on the planet. i read it quickly, so I could have missed a guideline. I did see the limits for small villages, and the prohibition of raising kids in large cities. A limit to the right to reproduce at all would seem necessary, with a license required in advance. Competence in caring for selves and material sufficiency to add a dependent seem reasonable to me as an addition.Responsibilities before rights! Steve
|
|
|
|
Re: [gaiapc] Analysis of the 2020 HDR
Eric, that is a very comprehensive
graphic!
With regard to your question <<Oh, and where should I put BPC?>>, I think that BPG (Blue Planet Governance) should be in the top RT corner, diagonally opposite from neo-classic economics. And the BPClub as a companion.
I had never heard of the Federation of
Watersheds. It has a very interesting and comprehensive
constitution document.
And it is very much in line with what I had speculated in an envisioned sustainable future. I'll read it again later, but on first brush it does not deal with the creation of money, a very important element, in my view. Don
The Federation exists to set global policy to manage & protect the planetary commons and define limits. Member Watersheds accept Federation policy and limits while non-members reject both and Federation assistance/benefits. Membership is voluntary and secession from the Union is a right.
On 2020-12-22 12:49 a.m., Eric Lee
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 11:56 AM, Luis Gutierrez wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: So happy to see the ethics of this club
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 07:10 AM, KAREN SHRAGG wrote:
A Call to Solve OverpopulaitonA call not merely to do the unthinkable and maybe, like you know, talk about 'it', the word starting with 'o' with 'population' in it. No, a call to solve as in find viable solutions to... something, I'm not sure what, and where's that latte I ordered? I would like to suggest a subtext meme (or theme) for BPC of 'real solutions' as distinct from feel-good politically sellable memes of salvation and solutions that are sure to come if only enough people join BPC and vote BPC Party (to come) lines. Sorry, but Gaia doesn't care what we believe. True believers don't need a better movement to join, but better stories to tell as told by Gaia who has all the answers. [E.g. 'For the first time in history a conviction has developed among those who can actually think more than a decade ahead that we are playing a global endgame. Humanity's grasp on the planet is not strong. It is growing weaker. Our population is too large....' — Edward O. Wilson, Half Earth: Our Planet's Fight for Life 2016] Our thinking, our informing of ourselves and others, and envisioning's of a better world, i.e. one that is actually sustainable because it is not based on pretend science and deeply held beliefs in political solutions (or religious salvation) that are sure to come if we vote correctly for the next truly great leader, i.e. alpha chest-beater with promises to believe in. In 12th century Europe, so far as anyone knew, everyone believed in religious salvation, and if you didn't, you didn't say so if you wanted to life. Things are so much better now, however. You can say anything, you can loudly declare and march in the streets with a sign proclaiming that you don't believe in political solutions. You can now just be ignored, then ridiculed, then marginalized, then obfuscated.... (at least until you write a bestselling book, e.g. Limits to Growth, that is viewed as a threat to the consensus view such that you need to be canceled). We need people who can tell better stories (i.e. systems science-based ones such as Rees, Wilson, Heinberg... tell that are not based on the pretend science of NCE Anthropocene enthusiasts, woke or not. The currently dominate consensus narrative is that there are true stories (to believe in, die for, kill for...). The only different story is that there are no true stories—the paradigm of no true paradigms, which is itself a paradigm [Donella Meadows, see Dark Mountain Manifesto review where Aluna=Gaia]. There are better stories that are more likely to allow some to pass through the bottleneck with information and functional, viable cultural memes/behaviors intact (e.g. trust, cooperation, love, understanding). We need people who can listen to Nature, and to those who endeavor to listen to Nature, who can then retell the better stories (e.g. such as H.T. Odum endeavored to tell) in a manner that enough of the intelligentsia storytellers can understand and maybe sort of retell to the public they serve with or without being paid to. This is not happening, but there is no biophysical reason to think that our consensus narrative is sustainable and, when it falters (based as it is on false domains of discourse, i.e. delusional storytelling) that we can't tell better stories, ones future QAnons can't tell but will pretend to tell as true stories, Telling better stories will change the consensus view and change our world. But if the change is to be for the better, the stories need to be about the what-is (aka reality that is different from our view of it) based on evidence which alone can (eventually) disconfirm deeply held beliefs (science is the endeavor to tell the most likely story) as Nature (aka evidence, the nature of things) alone determines. That we don't get a vote is a better story, as is that we, hubris Man (hu-mans), need to stand down and listen to Gaia.
|
|
|
|
Regarding the XR moment.
FYI, I have now signed on to both the local XR group and the main
organization.
https://rebellion.global/about-us/
Don
C
Don Chisholm: Engineering
Technologist 613
476 1700
|
|
|
|
Re: So happy to see the ethics of this club
Also, Karen, feel free to mention BPC
in your Move Upstream book!
Don
On 2020-12-19 10:21 a.m., Don Chisholm
wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: So happy to see the ethics of this club
Great to have you on board Karen.
I think I sent you a response from the
BPC page, but I'm just getting started at this.
The technical end of things has been set up by Eric Lee. Don
On 2020-12-19 8:18 a.m., KAREN SHRAGG
via groups.io wrote:
When I read the Blue Planet Club's ideas I felt like I was reading the next version of my two books, The first ( Move Upstream: A Call to Solve Overpopulaiton) The second, (Change Our Stories Change Our World.). The modeling of BPC moves these ideas even further upstream to demonstrate that another way of living on our planet is possible and IMPOSSIBLE if we do not change. I have always felt like an Earth Citizen trapped in a downstream narrative of blue and red states wondering when we would realize that the biosphere is ailing and needing our immediate attention at the highest levels..so thank you for this amazing and needed effort.
|
|
|
|
So happy to see the ethics of this club
KAREN SHRAGG
When I read the Blue Planet Club's ideas I felt like I was reading the next version of my two books, The first ( Move Upstream: A Call to Solve Overpopulaiton) The second, (Change Our Stories Change Our World.). The modeling of BPC moves these ideas even further upstream to demonstrate that another way of living on our planet is possible and IMPOSSIBLE if we do not change. I have always felt like an Earth Citizen trapped in a downstream narrative of blue and red states wondering when we would realize that the biosphere is ailing and needing our immediate attention at the highest levels..so thank you for this amazing and needed effort.
|
|
|
| 1 - 12 of 12 |