<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">peter waterman</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peterwaterman1936@gmail.com">peterwaterman1936@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:10 PM<br>Subject: Re: [NetworkedLabour] [Debate-List] (Fwd) On Avaaz clicktivism (Richard Poplak) ... On praising the G7... surely not, especially for climate malgovernance? (Avaaz, GP, critics)<br>To: Patrick Bond <<a href="mailto:pbond@mail.ngo.za">pbond@mail.ngo.za</a>>, WSFDiscuss List <<a href="mailto:WorldSocialForum-Discuss@openspaceforum.net">WorldSocialForum-Discuss@openspaceforum.net</a>><br>Cc: "<<a href="mailto:networkedlabour@lists.contrast.org">networkedlabour@lists.contrast.org</a>>" <<a href="mailto:networkedlabour@lists.contrast.org">networkedlabour@lists.contrast.org</a>>, DEBATE <<a href="mailto:debate-list@fahamu.org">debate-list@fahamu.org</a>><br><br><br><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 6:28 AM, Patrick Bond <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pbond@mail.ngo.za" target="_blank">pbond@mail.ngo.za</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<h1>Don’t let the baby eat carbs, and other reasons why Avaaz won’t
change the world</h1>
<div>
<ul>
<li> Richard Poplak </li>
<li><a href="http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/section/life-etc/" target="_blank">Life,
etc</a></li>
<li>23 Jul 2015 11:54 (South Africa)</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2015-07-23-dont-let-the-baby-eat-carbs-and-other-reasons-why-avaaz-wont-change-the-world/" target="_blank"><img alt="Poplak-on-AvaazSUBBED.jpg" border="0"></a></div>
<div>
<p>Remember when all your friends had a great <a href="http://dot.org" target="_blank">dot.org</a> idea, all of
which were one click away from transforming the world into a
rainbow-tinged Utopia? Me neither. But then my circle doesn’t
include an Oxford/Harvard/Kennedy School Brahman like Ricken
Patel, founder of Avaaz. The site focuses on change through
online petitioning, and it is currently “helping” concerned
South Africans battle the African National Congress’s (ANC’s)
draconian proposed internet regulations. But middle-class South
Africans don’t need help to not leave the house for a good
cause. RICHARD POPLAK wonders if Avaaz hasn’t finally perfected
the art of whining from behind electrified walls.</p>
</div>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span><i>He had fallen
under a spell and was writing letters to everyone under
the sun. He was so stirred by these letters that from the
end of June he moved from place to place with his valise
full of papers</i></span></span><span><span> </span></span><span><span><i>…
Hidden in the country, he wrote endlessly, frantically, to
the newspapers, to people in public life, to friends and
relatives and at last to the dead, his own obscure dead,
and finally the famous dead.</i></span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:60px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>Saul Bellow, </span></span><span><span><i>Herzog</i></span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>Let’s
begin with the definition of a social media mishap: a
professor/celebrity foodie dispenses infant nutritional
advice over Twitter. The perpetrator in question is none
other than Tim Noakes, prince of the </span></span><span><span>l</span></span><span><span>ow-</span></span><span><span>c</span></span><span><span>arb,
high-fat diet craze, and the man who pummelled middle-class
South African bookshelves with </span></span><span><span><i>The
Real Meal Revolution</i></span></span><span><span>. The
scenario: a mother wanted to know what she should start
feeding her baby, and in response Noakes advocated “low
carbohydrate, moderate protein, nutrient-dense food”. The
tweet was reported to the Health Professions Council of
South Africa, and a hearing was set for early June. </span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>The
issue is not whether we should be turning our babies into </span></span><span><span>svelte</span></span><span><span>
supermodels before they can walk. Nor is it whether
hamburgers are healthier than tuna salad garnished with air.
</span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>The
issue is whether this is an issue. </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>And
yet, one of those whizzbang new “agents for social change” —
AKA a website with an .org at the end of it — believes </span></span><a href="https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Health_Professions_Council_of_South_Africa_Support_Prof_Tim_Noakes_in_his_quest_to_improve_eating_guidelines/?pv=3" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0000ff"><span><span><span style="text-decoration:underline">Tim Noakes’s baby
food Tweet</span></span></span></span></a><span><span>
is worthy of an online petition in support of the professor
and his “quest to improve eating guidelines”. Or, rather,
the website’s community believes so. The 16,006 “signatures”
“signed” in support of Noakes cited the 150,000 copies of </span></span><span><span><i>Real
Meal</i></span></span><span><span> he’s sold, and the
“new book on infant feeding” he’s been working on “for the
past year”. The petition hopes to reach 20,000 signatures
backing this “initiative” at some point in the near future.
This is what Avaaz.org does—blast petitions into the ether
and, in some cases, develop robust letter writing campaigns.
Each and every cause scrolling across their website’s
carousel — “Stop food waste, end hunger!”; “ISA: Save our
Oceans!”; “From G7 to Paris: Goodbye Fossil Fuels!”— would
bring a smile to the face of the most hardened progressive.
This was what the internet was supposed to be about! Coding
change, connecting people, rewiring the world.</span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span><i>Anything
</i></span></span><span><span>is possible. </span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>But
anything is </span></span><span><span><i>not</i></span></span><span><span>
possible. Avaaz proves the limitations of liberal discourse
in the internet age as definitively as any site online.
Avaaz has entered the South African conversation on a number
of occasions: there are, after all, many animals in this
country, and therefore numerous opportunities to save them.
But their most recent South African campaign is somewhat
different. Entitled “SA internet ████ censorship”, an e-mail
blast sent out to Avaazers and their ilk went like this:</span></span><span><span>
</span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>Dear friends across South
Africa,</span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span><b>A new set
of regulations threatens the very essence of our internet
freedom.</b></span></span><span><span> They want to
police and crack down on our digital democracy </span></span><span><span>-
bu</span></span><span><span>t we are thousands of South
Africans getting this email and </span></span><span><span><b>we
have the power to bring down their barricades. </b></span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span><b>But we only have 48
hours to do it.</b></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>If the Film and
Publication Board’s (FPB</span></span><span><span>’s) </span></span><span><span>new
internet regulations are implemented, they’d have the right
to </span></span><span><span><b>review and classify
almost every blog, video, and personal website</b></span></span><span><span>
</span></span><span><span>—</span></span><span><span> even
Avaaz campaigns like this one. Think </span></span><span><span><b>apartheid-era
censorship</b></span></span><span><span>, reloaded
and super-charged for an all-out assault on our digital
freedoms. </span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span><b>Public
consultations end this week</b></span></span><span><span>,
and the FPB is on the back foot because their regulations
have been so widely ridiculed </span></span><span><span>—</span></span><span><span>
</span></span><span><span><b>a massive viral response
could finally pull the plug </b></span></span><span><span>on
these dangerous regulations. </span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>To make it happen,
all of us need to </span></span><span><span><b>sign and
share urgently</b></span></span><span><span> </span></span><span><span>—</span></span><span><span> Avaazers
make up 1% of the internet users in South Africa so if each
of us gets just one person to sign, we can reach 2%. If each
of us gets two people to sign, we can get to 3%, etc etc. </span></span><span><span><b>Sign
now and share on Facebook, Twitter, e-mail </b></span></span><span><span>...
everywhere </span></span><span><span>…</span></span><span><span>
</span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><i><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>(Bold courtesy of
Avaaz)</span></span></span></i></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>So
many questions. Who, I wanted to know, are “they”? What, I
wondered, is a “digital democracy”, when did we get one, and
what does “they’d have the right to review and classify
almost every blog, video, and personal website” actually </span></span><span><span><i>mean</i></span></span><span><span>?
The above six paragraphs are classic Avaaz, but also classic
internet activism — a context-free mulch of “holy fuck!”
declarations, followed by an invocation to post something on
your Facebook status update while hysterically tweeting
about the evils of </span></span><span><span><i>something</i></span></span><span><span>.
</span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>And
here’s the thing: the FPB’s proposed regulations are
extraordinarily unpleasant. But they require more than a
shouty e-mail to decipher. </span></span><span><span><i>(Ed
</i></span></span><span><span>—</span></span><span><span><i>
Exactly what Daily Maverick’s Julie Reid masterful
presented in </i></span></span><a href="http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-06-10-africas-worst-new-internet-censorship-law-everything-you-dont-want-to-know-but-need-to/#.VbFcJOiqqko" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0000ff"><span><span><i><span style="text-decoration:underline">Africa’s worst
new Internet Censorship Law: Everything you don’t
want to know – but need to</span></i></span></span></span></a><span><span><i>)</i></span></span><span><span>
They also fall into a far broader political story — the
snail-like but unceasing attempts of the Zuma ANC to roll
back freedom of expression, especially in the media.
Ultra-conservative and ham-fisted, the FDB’s attempts at
remaking the SABC circa 1988 is re-upped National Party
nonsense. Things like: </span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>5.1.1 Any person who intends
to distribute any film, game, or certain publication in the
Republic of South Africa shall first comply with section 18(1)
of the Act by applying, in the prescribed manner, for
registration as film or game and publications distributor.</span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>5.1.2 In the event that such
film, game or publication is in a digital form or format
intended for distribution online using the internet or other
mobile platforms, the distributor may bring an application to
the board for the conclusion of an online distribution
agreement, in terms of which the distributor, upon payment of
the fee prescribed from time to time by the minister of the
Department of Communications as the executive authority, may
classify its online content on behalf of the board, using the
board's classification guidelines and the Act …</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>And
also:</span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>7.5 In the event that such
content is a video clip on YouTube or any other global digital
media platform, the board may of its own accord refer such
video clip to the classification committee of the board for
classification.</span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>7.7 Upon classification, the
board shall dispatch a copy of the classification decision and
an invoice payable by the online distributor within 30 days,
in respect of the classification of the content in question.</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>But
why did Avaaz choose not to include these clauses in the
e-mail? Does Avaaz assume that Avaazers are too daft or too
time-constrained to actually digest all the legalese?
Indubitably. But if so, we must all die in a fiery pit, along
with our classification committee of the board for
classification-approved YouTube bar-mitzvah videos. </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>This
is a planet for adults, and citizenship is an active process.
Almost every day in this country, people leave their homes in
poorer communities in order to burn shit on the streets of
their community. In quieter climes — in the middle-class
enclaves in which we are told revolutions typically germinate
— nothing happens. Nothing at all. Crickets.</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span>One
begins to wonder if internet slacktivism isn’t a genius ploy
by the establishment to geld those who would, in years past,
have hit the streets en masse, looking to change the way
government operates. The thought of something spontaneous — a
rearing back against government policy — is almost laughable.
Next month, Zwelinzima Vavi will host an “anti-corruption
march,” but the amorphousness of the issue almost seems pulled
from Avaaz’s playbook:</span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span><i>Who likes corruption? </i></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span><i>No one!</i></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span><i>What are we gonna do about
it? </i></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left:30px"><span style="font-family:georgia,palatino;font-size:12pt"><span><i>Um …? </i></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>This
stuff has become a cliché, but it doesn’t make it any less
dangerous. This week, South Africans have to fight on two
digital fronts. The first is the FPB and their attempts to
equate our family videos with pornography. And the second is
Avaaz and their endeavours to help us click our way to
freedom. We need the ‘net, but we don’t </span></span><span><span><i>need</i></span></span><span><span>
the ‘net, if you hear what I’m saying. </span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:georgia,palatino"><span><span>The
rules of history are: occasionally things need to be burned.
No amount of clickbait is going to change that. Just ask
Noakes. Last I checked, fat babies were still a good thing.
</span></span><span><span><span style="text-decoration:underline"><b>DM</b></span></span></span></span></p>
<div><br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Subject:
</th>
<td>[Debate-List] On praising the G7... surely not,
especially for climate malgovernance? (Avaaz, GP, critics)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Wed, 17 Jun 2015 23:42:04 +0200</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>Patrick Bond <a href="mailto:pbond@mail.ngo.za" target="_blank"><pbond@mail.ngo.za></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap valign="BASELINE"><br>
</th>
<td><br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<a href="http://triplecrisis.com" target="_blank">triplecrisis.com</a><br>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><b><span><a href="http://triplecrisis.com/avaazs-climate-vanity/" title="Permanent Link to Avaaz’s Climate Vanity" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">Avaaz’s Climate Vanity</span></a><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><big><b><big><big><span>Upward
gazing
can be politically blinding</span></big></big></b></big><br>
<span><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span><a href="http://triplecrisis.com/author/patrick-bond/" title="Patrick Bond" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">Patrick Bond</span></a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Who’s
not heard the great African revolutionary Amilcar Cabral’s <a href="https://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/cabral/1965/tnlcnev.htm" title="injunction" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">injunction</span></a>,
fifty years ago, “<b><i>Tell no lies and claim no easy
victories</i></b>”? If, like me, you’re a petit bourgeois
who is hopeful for social progress, then let’s be frank: this
advice hits at our greatest weakness, the temptation of
back-slapping vanity.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>The
leading framers for the 41-million strong clicktivist team
from Avaaz need to remember Cabral. They over-reached
ridiculously last week in praising the G7:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span><img alt="Bond Avaaz" align="right" height="186" border="0" width="186"></span><span><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><i><span>Many
told
us it was a pipe dream, but the G7 Summit of leading world
powers just committed to getting the global economy off
fossil fuels forever!!! Even the normally cynical media is
raving that this is a huge deal. And it’s one giant step
closer to a huge win at the Paris summit in December –
where the entire world could unite behind the same goal of
a world without fossil fuels – the only way to save us all
from catastrophic climate change… Our work is far from
done, but it’s a day to celebrate – click here to read
more and say congratulations to everyone else in this
incredibly wonderful community!!</span></i><span><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Actually,
according to <a href="http://www.economist.com/news/international/21653964-why-g7-talking-about-decarbonisation-sort" title="The Economist" target="_blank"><i><span style="color:blue">The Economist</span></i></a><i>: </i>“<b>no
fossil-fuel-burning power station will be closed down</b> in
the immediate future as a result of this declaration. The goal
will <b>not make any difference to the countries’
environmental policies</b>, since they are mostly consistent
with this long-range goal anyway. Where they are not (some
countries are increasing coal use, for example) they will <b>not
be reined in</b> because of the new promises… the G7’s
climate effort raises as many questions as it answers. The
group seems to have <b>rejected proposals for more demanding
targets</b>, such as decarbonisation by 2050.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Or <a href="http://time.com/3918982/g7-summit-obama-united-states-isis-russia/" title="Time" target="_blank"><i><span style="color:blue">Time</span></i></a>:
“<b>The results were disappointing</b> to say the least… The
G7 announced an ‘ambitious’ plan to phase out all fossil fuels
worldwide by 2100. Unfortunately, <b>they didn’t make any
concrete plans to scale back their own conventional fuel
consumption.</b> That’s a big deal when 59 percent of
historic global carbon dioxide emissions—meaning the
greenhouse gases already warming the atmosphere—comes from
these seven nations. Taken as a group, G7 coal plants produce
twice the amount of CO2 as the entire African continent, and
at least 10 times the carbon emissions produced by the 48
least developed countries as a whole. <b>If the G7 is serious
about tackling climate change, they should start at home</b>.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>So what
was going on, really? Here’s a talking head from the <a href="http://atimes.com/2015/06/what-matters-and-what-doesnt-in-the-g7-climate-declaration/" title="Council on Foreign Relations" target="_blank"><i><span style="color:blue">Council on Foreign Relations</span></i></a>
(an imperialist braintrust): “The United States has long
pressed for a<b> shift away from binding emissions reduction
commitments</b> and toward a mix of nationally grounded
emission-cutting efforts and binding international commitments
to transparency and verification. European countries have
often taken the other side, emphasizing the importance of
binding targets (or at least policies) for cutting emissions.
Now it looks like the<b> big developed countries are on the
same page as the United States</b>. The language above is
all about binding countries to transparency – and <b>there
isn’t anything elsewhere in the communiqué about binding
them to actual emissions goals</b>.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>There
is an even tougher critique from the left, e.g. from Oscar
Reyes of the Institute for Policy Studies, who annotated the
G7 climate communique <a href="http://genius.com/6767353/G7-leaders-declaration-g7-summit-climate-section/The-upper-end-of-the-latest-ipcc-recommendation-of-40-to-70-reductions-by-2050-compared-to-2010" title="here" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">here</span></a>.
He lands many powerful blows, not least of which is that you
simply cannot trust these politicians. This is <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/02/us-g8-africa-idUSL0162462220080702" title="well known" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">well
known</span></a> in Africa. Exactly a decade ago, Tony
Blair led the (then-G8) Gleneagles Summit that made all manner
of ambitious redistributive promises for the continent that
weren’t fulfilled.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Another
promise to look at more critically is whether ‘net zero’
carbon emissions by 2100 will be gamed through ‘false
solutions’ like Carbon Capture and Storage, dropping iron
filings in the ocean to create algea blooms, and expansion of
timber plantations to suck up CO2. The most serious watchdogs
here, the <a href="http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2015/06/net-zero-is-not-zero-the-g7s-dystopian-decarbonization/" title="ETC group" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">ETC
group</span></a>, <a href="http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/caught_in_the_net_actionaid.pdf" title="ActionAid" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">ActionAid</span></a>
and <a href="http://dcgeoconsortium.org/2014/11/10/uncertainties-is-an-understatement-when-it-comes-to-beccs/" title="Biofuelwatch" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">Biofuelwatch</span></a>, agree that the
G7 needs to reverse its energy ministers’ recent endorsement
of these Dr Strangelove strategies.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Put it
all together, and after last week’s Elmau G7 Summit, admits
even <a href="http://www.euractiv.com/sections/sustainable-dev/ngos-unsure-lukewarm-g7-climate-deal-315218" title="Oxfam" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">Oxfam</span></a>
(often also upward gazing), “This lukewarm summit result will
<b>only make the fight harder, if not impossible</b>.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Avaaz
are not only embarrassingly contradicted on their right flank.
The organisation’s premature celebration is <i>dangerous. </i>After
all, the conservative (pro-market pro-insiderism
anti-activism) wing of ‘climate action’ politics – as distinct
from climate <i>justice </i>advocacy – is gaming us all now,
arguing that the Paris COP21 can result in a victory. Avaaz
just amped up that narrative.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Will
the mild-mannered Climate Action Network (CAN) join a big
all-in tent to maximise Paris popular mobilisations? In 2011
at the COP17, that’s the approach that civil society tried in
Durban, to my <a title="regret"><span style="color:blue">regret</span></a>. I
think CJ activists drawing in CAN – and Avaaz – may be making
a serious <a href="http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Climate-Movement-Across-Movements-20150326-0035.html" title="mistake" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">mistake</span></a>.
For this surprising Avaaz spin – declaring victory at the G7 –
compounds the essential problem of mis-estimating the rigour
of the fight ahead.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>The
reality: if we don’t dramatically change the balance of forces
and applaud activists who do much more militant modes of
engagement, then global COP malgovernance continues another 21
years. Civil disobedience has been<a href="https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/reversing-climate-change-what-will-it-take/" title=" breaking out" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue"> breaking out</span></a> in all sorts
of blockadia spaces, and so surely Avaaz should put 99% of its
climate advocacy effort into amplifying the work of those
heroes?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>From
Paris, one of the main organisers of COP21 protests, Maxime
Combes, was suitably <a href="http://blogs.mediapart.fr/blog/maxime-combes/090615/linertie-du-g7-prepare-de-nouveaux-crimes-climatiques-decryptage" title="cynical" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">cynical</span></a>
about the G7, which “had already committed in 2009 (in Italy)
to not exceed 2° C and to achieve a reduction of at least 50%
of global emissions by 2050. So nothing new in the 2015
declarations except that at that time they had also committed
to reduce by 80% or more their own emissions by 2050. No
mention of this target is present in the declaration this
year.” Avaaz is young, yes, but still should be able to
recognise <i>backsliding </i>over the half-dozen years.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Last
September, I was greatly <a href="http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Climate-Justice-Resurfaces-amidst-New-Yorks-Corporate-Sharks-20140924-0082.html" title="heartened" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">heartened</span></a>
by Avaaz mobilising (not messaging), against what were my own
prior <a href="http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=12381" title="predictions" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">predictions</span></a>
(on <i>RealNews </i>from 4’00”, reflecting pessimism thanks
partly to Avaaz’s awfully unfortunate New York subway <a href="https://twitter.com/pinelli_adrien/status/505485038381965312" title="adverts" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">adverts</span></a>,
putting “hipsters and bankers in the same <s>boat</s>
march”). That wonderful mass march linked the issues and put
non-compromising placards high into the air (way higher than
‘climate action’ or pro-nuke or pro-cap-and-trade), and the
next day, the Flood Wall Street protest hit corporations hard
for a few hours. Avaaz and allies appropriately had us
marching <b><i>away </i></b>from the UN, because after all
nothing useful has happened there regarding air pollution – or
any global crisis for that matter – since the 1987 Montreal
Protocol addressed the ozone hole by banning CFCs.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<br>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><img alt="" height="281" width="375"> <img alt="" height="293" width="374"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>And I
am also one who appreciates Avaaz’s excellent petition
machinery. (It’s in use now generating awareness and
solidarity for truly excellent anti-mining campaigns two hours
<a href="https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Investors_of_Mineral_commodities_LTD_MRC_Stop_forced_mining_on_South_Africas_Wild_Coast/?sTLrPib" title="south" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">south</span></a>
and <a href="https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Susan_Shabangu_Minister_of_Mineral_Resources_Reject_Ibutho_Coals_application_for_a_mine_on_the_boundary_of_iMfolozi/?pv=14" title="north" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">north</span></a>
of where I live in Durban, for example.) So this is not a
standard lefty critique of clicktivism. It is a recognition of
how desperately important it is for Avaaz to retain maximum
credibility in the mainstream and among hard-core activists
alike. Endorsing the world’s 1% politicians is quite surreal,
given how little they did last week in Bavaria, what with
their 85-year time horizon and orientation to false solutions.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Avaaz
wasn’t alone, by the way. From a <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center/news-releases/Greenpeace-Responds-to-Climate-Progress-at-Todays-G7-Meeting/" title="press release" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">press release</span></a> I learned from
Greenpeace’s international climate politics officer Martin
Kaiser: “Elmau delivered.” Also, from Greenpeace US Energy
Campaign director Kelly Mitchell, “Leaders at the G7 meeting
have put forward a powerful call to move the global economy
away from fossil fuels and toward a renewable energy future.
Heading into the Paris climate meeting this year, it’s a
significant step toward securing a commitment to 100%
renewable energy by 2050.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Tell no
lies, claim no easy victories. What I hope might happen is
that in future Avaaz, Greenpeace and similar well-meaning
activists might at least see it in their interest to tell the
truth and intensify the battle <b><i>against</i></b> the
leaders of the G7 (and the BRICS too) <b><i>and especially
against </i></b>the
corporations that yank their chains. Instead of Avaaz <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Avaaz?rf=106321336073398&filter=2" title="massaging" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">massaging</span></a>
the G7 elites for “sending an immediate signal to dirty and
clean energy investors that will help accelerate the
clean-energy boom we desperately need,” as if capitalism can
solve the climate crisis, why not re-boot the power relations?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>How
about this wording, instead: “Since the G7 rulers finally
recognise that fossil fuels must stay underground, <i>duh!</i>,
but still<b><i> fail to act decisively to that end</i></b>, we
in Avaaz condemn the politicians. We’ll redouble our efforts
to target their biggest fossil investors. We’ll do so through
not only divestment – achieved by small investor committees in
wealthy Global North institutions – but now we’ll also turn
Avaaz’s mighty 41-million strong listserve towards consumer
boycotts of the corporations and especially the banks that
have the most power over these G7-BRICS politicos. And we’ll
get legal and media support for anyone blockading these firms,
since the ‘necessity defence’ for civil disobedience is
becoming much more vital to our world’s near-term survival.
Even the Pope’s new climate Encylical agrees.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span>Wouldn’t
that be a more satisfying and nutritious strategy than the
climate junkfood email that millions just received from Avaaz?
I really felt a little sick after consuming it. Surely Avaaz
can see the merits of shifting the goalposts to the left each
time they have a chance, and thus <i>enhancing the climate
justice struggle</i> – not joining the G7 in a<i> fatal
climate snuggle</i>.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><i><span>Patrick
Bond
is author of </span></i><span>Politics
of
Climate Justice<i> and, in Durban, directs the University of
KwaZulu-Natal <a href="http://ccs.ukzn.ac.za/" title="Centre for Civil Society" target="_blank"><span style="color:blue">Centre
for Civil Society</span></a>.</i></span></p><span><font color="#888888">
<br>
-- <br>
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current
email and log in using gmail to access the archives.<br>
<a href="https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en" target="_blank">https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en</a><br>
--- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups <a href="mailto:debate-list@fahamu.org" target="_blank">"debate-list@fahamu.org"</a> group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to <a href="mailto:debate-list+unsubscribe@fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list+unsubscribe@fahamu.org</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href="mailto:debate-list@fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list@fahamu.org</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href="http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/</a>.<br>
<br><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
</font></span></font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><span><font color="#888888">
<br>
</font></span></font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><span><font color="#888888">
<p></p>
-- <br>
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email and log in using gmail to access the archives.<br>
<a href="https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en" target="_blank">https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en</a><br>
--- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "<a href="mailto:debate-list@fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list@fahamu.org</a>" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:debate-list+unsubscribe@fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list+unsubscribe@fahamu.org</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href="mailto:debate-list@fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list@fahamu.org</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href="http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/</a>.<br>
</font></span></font></span></blockquote></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><font size="1"><span style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><b><font color="#ff0000">Recent publications</font></b></span></font><br><br><font size="1"><span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)">1. </span>2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism</a> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ (Free).<span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)"> 2.</span> 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).<span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)">3.</span> 2014. with Laurence Cox, ‘Movement Internationalism/s’, Interface: a Journal for and about Social Movements. (Editorial), Vol. 6 (2), pp. 1–12.<span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)"> 4.</span> 2014. ‘The International Labour Movement in, Against and Beyond, the Globalized and Informatized Cage of Capitalism and Bureaucracy. (Interview). Interface: a Journal for and about Social Movements. Vol. 6 (2), pp. 35-58.<span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)"> 5.</span> 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: Struggles for Other Worlds (Part I). (10 Euros).<span style="color:rgb(255,0,0)"> 6. </span>2015. Waterman, Peter. <a href="https://escarpmentpress.org/globallabour/article/download/2338/2433" target="_blank">‘Beyond Labourism, Development and Decent Work’.</a> Global Labour Journal, 2015, 6(2), pp. 246-50.</font><br><br></div><div><font size="1"><span style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><font color="#ff0000"><b>More publications, click [////]</b></font><br></span></font></div><div><table cellpadding="0"><tbody><tr></tr></tbody></table><font size="1">
</font><font size="1">
</font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</font></span></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
NetworkedLabour mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NetworkedLabour@lists.contrast.org">NetworkedLabour@lists.contrast.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour</a><br>
<br></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: <a href="http://commonstransition.org" target="_blank">http://commonstransition.org</a> </div><div><br></div>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a> - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank"></a>Updates: <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br><br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href="http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/" target="_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br></div></div></div></div>
</div>