Doesn't sound like he wants to fix global warming, just install an eco-dictatorship.

And using the West Bank as a talking point about climate change? Give me a break. I think we know where James is coming from

Bottom line: democracies will only accept draconian CO2 reduction measures (and let's be clear, the measures being proposed are going to make us much poorer) if and when the world heats up uncomfortably.

That has not happened yet

Grn “Doesn't sound like he wants to fix global warming, just install an eco-dictatorship. “

Yep, I take the same view

From the article “The world has has extremely complex systems problems but we have no matching forms of governance to correct them. We need to move from soft to hard global governance, from “Global Compact” to “Global Contract”.

I fail to see how “hard governance” makes “extremely complex systems problems” easier to manage or resolve.

In my book of common phraseology, “hard governance” means a more authoritarian attitude of state, requiring more laws, higher taxes, less individual freedom or discretion, in all, the sort of despotism which failed the Russian people for 70 years.

I would also note, all human development and advancement and understanding has been as a result of individual commitment, never government commitment. Thus the “hard governance” would, in fact, hinder the likley understanding of the “extremely complex systems problems” which the author talks about.

The other point is "extremely complex systems problems" is double-speak for "I do not know how to manage or influence what is happening".

Do not inflict upon me or attempt to restrict my liberty with someone elses lack of knowledge or stupidity. Such policies deserve to be burned and governments which support such policies, assigned to the cesspool of extinction.

I believe it is better to leave people to adjust their personal practices and expectations to the market system we know, than pretend any advances will be ever made by inflicting draconian governance, based on ignorance and fear, upon us .

Bo Ekman is just promoting “Socialism by Stealth”, driven by fear of the unknown and it sucks.

As I wrote on the previous article under this heading, all the Trots ran to inflitrate the environmental movements and it sounds like they are as busy as ever.

A reasoned and rational article, I agree with much of what the author says.

“Trust levels are low within international systems; paranoia and citizen surveillance and nationalism are at a high.” The previous posts typify this paranoia and fixation on us/them and Left/Right.

“Targets are defined according to what is judged as politically possible in the short term and economically desirable, rather than what is required to guarantee a stable ecosystem in the long-term.” Yep, political/economic ideologues shill for short term self-gratification, regardless of the consequences of their inaction.

As usual, the blind choir sings in tune their mantra. They have no vision, lack imagination for a better world and prefer a future entrenched in the past without any idea of environmental, economic and ecological sustainable development.

Col Rouge's response with its extremist libertarian and revisionist views of history, point to the massive difficulties we face in dealing with climate change. Individual rights and economic rights are now, in this culture, the greatest good - and you don't tamper with them unless you can prove the ship is sinking. The complexity of systems doesn't matter in this analysis - the time lag between damage and effect doesn't matter. Hard proof, the water lapping at my knees is the only proof that will do. Underpinning this madness is another - that technology, human inventiveness will save us if we get it wrong. The extreme libertarians will accept a loss of rights for threats of terror - in other words threats that a few people or even a few hundred will die through random and atrocious acts of violence. And they will accept continuing increases in government power to counter this threat regardless of how real or established it is. But not with a threat that is massively larger, more dangerous - and probably more real. And perhaps this is the heart of the issue - they not only do not believe in global warming because they refuse to believe in anything that so undermines the credibility of a system that they have believed in for so long. Remember the reaction to Galileo.

Col Rouge et al believe they were put on this earth to consume and acquire wealth regardless of who pays the price. What he fears most is any threat that will compromise his cherished way of life which has been provided to a greater degree at someone else' expense. This earth does have limits to growth and does have inequalities that are contrived by the present haves against the have nots.

Next “Individual rights and economic rights are now, in this culture, the greatest good “

Individual rights are of course, not sure what you mean by “economic rights” but if that means everyone is allowed to improve their personal circumstances to the best of their individual endeavours, then yes I agree.

The great thing about ‘this culture’ or this time in history is individuals are not constrained and labeled at birth to a given class or, as Indians call it, “caste”.

I wish to see all people free to make their own life decisions and benefit from their own efforts. Anything else is immoral and detrimental to human evolution.

“Remember the reaction to Galileo.”

Ah remember it well, the authorities set about to curb galilleos individual view, threats of excommunication and worse were used, by the “priesthood”, to bring the radical individual back into line.

We now live in more enlightened times, provided we resist the despotism of compulsory global warming as defined by the modern “priesthood” of supposed climate scientists.

Thylacine “Col Rouge et al believe . .”

you of much opinion and little intellect, who claims to know me. I could walk up and take a dump on your doorstep and you would not recognize me.

You have no idea who I am, what inspires me or motivates me to post here.
And yet you claim to know my life purpose.

The first act of the dullard is to enviously criticize those he does not know.

Howdy dullard.

Re “haves and have-nots”, all I have, I have earned by diligent deployment of my intellect and consistent effort.
That you have a problem with that, I cannot understand, unless you are admitting what I suspect, that you simply lack the diligence, intellect and effort to achieve for yourself.

“What he fears most is”

Nothing, not even death. I live my life my way and will enjoy it to the end. It is only “little men” who fear and obviously, for you to comment on what I am supposedly afraid of, shows it is foremost in your mind.