This is a long assed-video.  But two minutes in I realize I have an obligation to watch this one.  Like it was part of a job.


Dana is a Diner who does not know it.  Only because she does not know who we are.  Nineteen minutes in Dana says 'research shows' fossil fuel buys votes.  Twenty-six minutes Dana says we need to lean into activism.  I agree.  I say very hard.  The reason is the 'deciders' will not do anything.  I agree, nothing will happen without pressure.

QuotePower concedes nothing without a demand.

Forty minutes in Dana is being a bit unrealistic.  She thinks evaluating ever activity in terms of carbon emissions is important.  How much CO2 does a peace march release?  I'm feeling disappointment.  Dana is the sociologist who understands that resource depletion (global heating is included in that) is a social issue not a technical issue.  I would pay attention to her CO2 calculations, but nobody else would.  Nerds are a minority.

Dana points out online organization is inadequate.  If people do not meet in person efforts are worthless.  My words not hers, but she makes the point.  At the Diner we agree.  People making connections is what is important.  COVID was a huge setback.

Dana is coming from a 'Bowling Alone' perspective.  Climate issues will not be addressed until people start coming together.  That won't happen until climate shocks are severe.  Very severe considering the new age of ubiquitous censorship I think.

Dana sees moments of opportunity after climate shocks.  People in and after a shock become socially oriented for a short period of time.  How to lengthen the time?

An hour in Dana says this summer is going to be climate hell.  Place your bets.

Dana kept the discussion 'in the matrix', and I think she did this deliberately.  Why? because she wants converts not enemies.

Do doomers serve a function.  We do if we engender anger at the system.  Before there can be a social change in consciousness overall attitude has to get MORE apocalyptic.

QuoteThe earth is not dying, it is being killed. And the people who are killing it have names and addresses.

My words, not originally, but they are now.

One hour and sixteen minutes in Dana describes clean vs  conventional energy consumption.  The actual situation.  If she knows what it is, she should mention Jevon's Paradox and how to deal with it.  Dealing with it is not hard but you have to know what it is.  So you do not do exactly the wrong thing.  As most Green New People think to do. 

(Looks like she does not know about Jevon's.)

Appropriate advice at the end.