I totally agree with Kevin Anderson and he repeats something I have said for some time. It is the affluent middle-class who contribute most to climate-change. And yet they try to demonize those on low-incomes and benefits.
This is particularly true of certain members of Manchester Green Party, who make token gesture, like showing up at meetings holding a bicycle. Though they are motorists, who cannot live without their cars. One person in particular, I do not think has never used public transport in her entire life. Others are quite happy to jump on a jet for short journeys, such as to Ireland. Then they dismiss those who live in social housing as being uneducated and do not care about climate change. They do care, but why, when the are struggling to warm their homes, should they listen to some clown, from an affluent background, who is living quite well?

In fact, these so-called educated middle-class bullies and hypocrites, are the ones who need to change the way they live. And I think JK Rowlings comments in the Guardian, more or less potray my own thoughts on middle-class hypocrisy:


and I think these middle-class hypocrites should also take note of what an American newscaster had to say about bullies:


I have said it before, ‘Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, every where I look, nothing but hypocrisy and not a drop of truth to quench my thirst for knowledge’.  Sorry Samuel Taylor Coleridge for adulterating part of your The Rime of the Ancyent Marinere.

manchester climate monthly

Below is Professor Kevin Anderson’s submission for the recent “Climate Clock is Ticking” series.  The Guardian don’t appear to have used it in either their print edition or online.  Below his submission we have posted our response to the same invitation.

The request for the piece from the New Economics Foundation was:

‘The Climate Clock is Ticking. Normal isn’t Working. What Will You Do Differently?’

We would like to use your answer in a feature of collected insights to mark the half-
way point of the 100 months climate countdown that began in August 2008, and to
highlight what can be done differently in the next 50 months.


My day job is to translate the science of climate change into the everyday language
we use to understand our lives. To chaperon policy-makers in the transition towards
a low-carbon UK, and to help companies and civil society understand the…

View original post 1,136 more words

Thoughts on why environmental groups failed to engage with a wider audience?

I was asked to do a post on why environmental groups which are predominately white middle-class, do not attract more of the working-class?  This is only some thoughts I had whilst doing some gardening and is not intended to answer the question at this present time.

The middle-class environmental activists dismiss the working-class (social & council housing tenants), as not caring about the environmental, even to the extent of scorning them.

They should stop to think, who is causing the most environmental damage?  The working-class or the business and political classes?  Who has failed the World most, the poor or rich?

The working-class are bombarded by advertising TV programmes and films showing how well off everyone else is.  So they aspire to this, this of course the point of advertising and the consumer oriented media.  These are the people who can least afford the things advertised, but they feel they have failed, if they do not have the things it would appear everyone else has.

So instead of telling those with the least, that they should do more, the environmentalist should be getting the message across to businesses and politicians, that they have to change.  The way to try and change the ‘working-class’ altitude ( as well as banning advertising), is to educate the children in how to live more environmentally friendly.  Such as schemes promoted by the Soil Association, which is the Food for Life Partnership.  To empower the working-class by actually involving them with the decision making at the start of any project being proposed.