@divineorder
i'm not easy about not participating, investigating and writing articles; miss my journalism ... missing my voice in print or missing something, the battle upon is us and i'm consumed beyond the front lines; tied up and frustrated and uneasy.

This, in front of our eyes, the feeling of the skin, abnormal seasons-- trees lost here--not changing colors? not yet, anyways, way off normal in my lifetime.

Or is it the underlying dismal politic causing restlessness? Don't know, but something clicked reading your work and i sit very happy in tonight's compliation of hope. Cheers.

#1.2 given current reality. Thanks for the comment and the music.

From the article quoted below:

Don't despair: the climate fight is only over if you think it is
Rebecca Solnit

After the panicky IPCC report on climate change, it’s easy for pessimism to set in – but that would be conceding defeat

SNIP

The histories of change that have made me hopeful are often about small groups that seem at the outset unrealistic in their ambition. Whether they were taking on slavery in antebellum USA or human rights in the Soviet bloc, these movements grew exponentially and changed consciousness and then toppled institutions or regimes. We also don’t know what technological breakthroughs, large-scale social changes, or catastrophic ecological feedback loops will shape the next 20 years. Knowing that we don’t know isn’t grounds for confidence, but it is fuel against despair, which is a form of certainty. This future is as uncertain as it’s ever been.
Sign up to the Green Light email to get the planet's most important stories
Read more

There have been countless encouraging developments in the global climate movement. The movement was small, fragmented, mild a dozen years ago, and the climate recommendations then were mostly polite, with too much change-your-lightbulbs focus on personal virtue. But personal virtue only matters if it scales up (and even individual acts depend on collective decisions – I have, for example, 100% renewable electricity at home because other citizens pushed our amoral power company to evolve, and it’s more feasible for me to ride a bike because there are now bike lanes all over my city).

The movement that has taken on pipelines and fuel trains, refineries and shipping terminals, fracking and mountaintop removal, divestment and finance, policy and law, and sometimes won is evidence of what can happen in 12 years. Some of what were regarded as climate activists’ wild ideas and unreasonable demands are now policy and conventional common sense. There are so many transformative projects under way from local work to transition off fossil fuels, to the effort to stop pipelines (with some major victories, including the one to stop the Trans-Mountain pipeline, which won in court in late August), to the lawsuit against the US government on behalf of 21 young people, charging it with violating their rights and the public trust. The trial begins on 29 October in Eugene, Oregon.

SNIP

There's more, worth a complete read imo.

@divineorder
Yes. We were through there on a recent trip.

I made a pilgrimage to the Henry Miller Library.

I wish more progressives would make the connection between the perpetual war and the environment. If you're an environmentalist you must be an anti-war activist also.
The two issues are intertwined.

#5.1 Coast adjacent to Julia Pfeiffer SP. April, 2018.

You probably saw this awhile back?

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/1/23/16918280/trump-mili...

By and large, US military leadership understands that climate change is happening and is keen to understand the impending impacts on readiness. (See this 2016 report from the National Intelligence Council for more.)

Beyond damage from climate impacts, the military is also increasingly hampered by its reliance on fossil fuel supply lines, the greatest point of vulnerability in Iraq and Afghanistan. I once wrote a story for Outside magazine about the Marines’ (then-)new Expeditionary Energy Office, meant to make increasingly power-hungry forward deployments more independent of fuel convoys through, e.g., field-packable solar panels.
Marines and sailors of India Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, and their Afghan national army counterparts, pose in front of a solar array at Patrol Base Sparks, in Sangin District.
Marines and sailors of India Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, and their Afghan national army counterparts pose in front of a solar array at Patrol Base Sparks, in Sangin District, Afghanistan. DVIDS

Speaking of Mattis, here’s an excerpt from that piece:

The tactical need to reduce reliance on fossil fuels is not new to the Pentagon. In 2003, at the outset of the second Iraq war, General James Mattis commanded the 1st Marine Division during the initial drive to Baghdad. He found himself repeatedly outrunning his own fuel resupply lines, forcing him to slow down to remain fully powered. In a post-combat report that has since become a touchstone for military analysts, he called on the Department of Defense to “unleash us from the tether of fuel.”

Mattis’s plea served to highlight the extraordinary costs of fuel to the military in Afghanistan and Iraq—in dollars and lives. By some estimates, fully 70 percent of the convoys crisscrossing the theater of war are involved in “liquid logistics,” the delivery of fuel and water. In Afghanistan, fuel reaches the front lines via tankers and planes that cross the ocean, trucks from Tajikistan or Russia, and (sometimes) helicopters from forward bases. By the time it gets there, the fully burdened cost can reach anywhere from $30 to an astounding $400 per gallon. Then there are the casualties: one for every 24 fuel convoys, according to a 2009 report by the Army Environmental Policy Institute.

Point being, concern about climate change (and reducing reliance on fossil fuels) has been percolating through US military leadership for well over a decade. Programs are underway; the bureaucratic machinery is in gear.

@divineorder

acknowledged that climate change was a bigger threat to the country than terrorism. Okay. Then what were they going to do about it? I thought some plans were in the works back then?

Another great article on climate change. This is pretty brutal, but probably very true. Resources are running low and we know that the sociopaths that be won't want to share them with us.

Why Catastrophic Climate Change is Probably Inevitable Now

It strikes me that the planet’s fate is now probably sealed. We have just a decade in which to control climate change — or goodbye, an unknown level of catastrophic, inescapable, runaway warming is inevitable. The reality is: we’re probably not going to make it. It’s highly dubious at this juncture that humanity is going to win the fight against climate change.

Yet that is for a very unexpected — yet perfectly predictable — reason: the sudden explosion in global fascism — which in turn is a consequence of capitalism having failed as a model of global order. If, when, Brazil elects a neo-fascist who plans to raze and sell off the Amazon — the world’s lungs — then how do you suppose the fight against warming will be won? It will be set back by decades — decades…we don’t have. America’s newest Supreme Court justice is already striking down environmental laws — in his first few days in office — but he will be on the bench for life…beside a President who hasn’t just decimated the EPA, but stacked it with the kind of delusional simpletons who think global warming is a hoax. Again, the world is set by back by decades…it doesn’t have. Do you see my point yet? Let me make it razor sharp.

My friends, catastrophic climate change is not a problem for fascists — it is a solution. History’s most perfect, lethal, and efficient one means of genocide, ever, period. Who needs to build a camp or a gas chamber when the flood and hurricane will do the dirty work for free? Please don’t mistake this for conspiracism: climate change accords perfectly with the foundational fascist belief that only the strong should survive, and the weak — the dirty, the impure, the foul — should perish. That is why neo-fascists do not lift a finger to stop climate change — but do everything they can to in fact accelerate it, and prevent every effort to reverse or mitigate it.

Yeah. Can't find anything to disagree with here. The question is are we going to let them just wipe out anyone who they feel is inferior to them or will this be the issue that gets to fight back? It will be an uphill battle, but what's the alternative?

#5.2

US military thinkers have been warning about the national security implications of climate change for quite a while.https://t.co/QzOau4GEdD

— Liz Schiller (@LMegaparsec) October 15, 2018

Under the Trump admin they cannot take into account climate. Wonder why? More money to be made rebuilding!