Energy policy

[sen-no-sen]

Major contradiction, since this presupposes developing infinitely the causes of the alteration of nature, in an attempt to remedy it!
There is an aporia there which it seems impossible to escape! And yet, if there is an impasse, it is because the premises of reasoning are false.

Once again a brilliant analysis!
We can also extrapolate this notion to all the flagship subjects so dear to our politicians (supposedly!): Jobs, housing, health, security etc ...
It is clear today that the system perpetuates the very causes of our "misfortunes".

[Did67]

Just to argue. Not to contradict.

a) I would be more nuanced on EELV. It is not a homogeneous movement. So there is a bit of everything. In addition, at local levels (town hall, Regional Councils), there have been interesting actions, often passed unnoticed. Here an incinerator which has not been set up, but the selective sorting and weighted instead, etc ...

Let us nuance our thoughts, they will only tighten them more!

b) I fear that if the green "ideas" were imposed more, it could only be through a "coup"!

Let's not forget, guys, that we are a band of ultra-minority Huluberlus in the country!

If our ideas were imposed like that, it would be a "putsch"!

What the vast majority of French people want is cheap electricity, a dropping price of scraburants, "pretty" and "comfortable" cars, a single-family house ... salt pans which go up to consume more.
We shouldn't blame EELV for failing to change that with a snap of the fingers!

How many readers on this forum ? For 65 million French people and I don't know how many Belgians, Swiss and other French speakers?

c) On the participation of "greens" in government, I am still thinking of Germany. There, the "grünen" swallowed the grapes of the time of the red-green coalition (SPD-Grünen). And yet, today, on energy issues, we see the shock wave: exit from nuclear power, leader in PV, leader in biogas ...

I am one of those who thinks that we have to do "entryism". I made some. We leave feathers there. You have to have enormous resilience ... but it is better to have 5% reasons with everyone than 100% alone!

That's just my opinion. And my previous choices ...

[I am far from being an EELV activist or member; that was not my commitment]

[bamboo]

Chatelot, you point to a major contradiction in our societies:

However, the economy is the main point of ecology! Aligning wishful thinking without the means to achieve is useless: all ecological decisions are also economical.

This economist vision is so pervasive that it contaminates all aspects of life and, you are right, this is how ecology, or rather its sad caricature, presents itself today.

Major contradiction, since this presupposes developing infinitely the causes of the alteration of nature, in an attempt to remedy it!
There is an aporia there which it seems impossible to escape! And yet, if there is an impasse, it is because the premises of reasoning are false.

Let us not count on the elected representatives of EELV, anesthetized by the gold of the Republic, to push the questioning on other foundations!

Forgive me Ahmed, but you make a contradiction of it simply because you postulate that the economy is synonymous with infinite development.
Perhaps the problem is simply there.

If we remove this assumption, the economy becomes some kind of trade facilitation tool. And ecology can use this tool to guide behavior towards greener skies.

Take the example of a carbon tax (even if it is unpopular). It would be an economic tool to direct purchases towards local and recycled products. There is no need of an infinite world for this.

[Did67]

Someone may unearth the thread on this carbon tax, where it would appear, I remember very well, that here, on econology, the vast majority complained against!

[I had, at the time, tried to explain the interest of the thing ... I don't think I convinced many people ... which shows how complicated it is to influence our society in a massive way and significant towards a greener economy; between the ayatollahs of ecology and the green kmehrs, between the "conspirators" - anyway, the big companies manipulate everything -, the "anarchists / revolutionaries, etc" - anyway, the state is always hindering us -, the margin is very narrow ... And as long as all these beautiful people are arguing, there is little chance that anything will change!]

[bamboo]

Someone may unearth the thread on this carbon tax, where it would appear, I remember very well, that here, on econology, the vast majority complained against!

[I had, at the time, tried to explain the interest of the thing ... I don't think I convinced many people ... which shows how complicated it is to influence our society in a massive way and significant towards a greener economy; between the ayatollahs of ecology and the green kmehrs, between the "conspirators" - anyway, the big companies manipulate everything -, the "anarchists / revolutionaries, etc" - anyway, the state is always hindering us -, the margin is very narrow ... And as long as all these beautiful people are arguing, there is little chance that anything will change!]

Yes, I also remember ...
I was on the same side as you

[Remundo]

List of carbon tax topics

[bamboo]

Note that I was only talking about carbon tax here as an example of a tool.

[chatelot16]

Just to argue. Not to contradict.

a) I would be more nuanced on EELV. It is not a homogeneous movement. So there is a bit of everything. In addition, at local levels (town hall, Regional Councils), there have been interesting actions, often passed unnoticed. Here an incinerator which has not been set up, but the selective sorting and weighted instead, etc ...

Let us nuance our thoughts, they will only tighten them more!

b) I fear that if the green "ideas" were imposed more, it could only be through a "coup"!

Let's not forget, guys, that we are a band of ultra-minority Huluberlus in the country!

If our ideas were imposed like that, it would be a "putsch"!

What the vast majority of French people want is cheap electricity, a dropping price of scraburants, "pretty" and "comfortable" cars, a single-family house ... salt pans which go up to consume more.
We shouldn't blame EELV for failing to change that with a snap of the fingers!

How many readers on this forum ? For 65 million French people and I don't know how many Belgians, Swiss and other French speakers?

c) On the participation of "greens" in government, I am still thinking of Germany. There, the "grünen" swallowed the grapes of the time of the red-green coalition (SPD-Grünen). And yet, today, on energy issues, we see the shock wave: exit from nuclear power, leader in PV, leader in biogas ...

I am one of those who thinks that we have to do "entryism". I made some. We leave feathers there. You have to have enormous resilience ... but it is better to have 5% reasons with everyone than 100% alone!

That's just my opinion. And my previous choices ...

[I am far from being an EELV activist or member; that was not my commitment]

these nuances are useful: an effective political party must precisely be the machine to give force to hurluberlu who can nothing if they are isolated

a party must spend money on communication, to publicize what it does and what works, without waiting for journalists who only talk about what does not work

even sarkosi fell into this trap: he failed to let people know what he did well, and it was thrown away because the journalists only talked about what would exasperate everyone

[sen-no-sen]

Just to argue. Not to contradict.

a) I would be more nuanced on EELV. It is not a homogeneous movement. So there is a bit of everything. In addition, at local levels (town hall, Regional Councils), there have been interesting actions, often passed unnoticed. Here an incinerator which has not been set up, but the selective sorting and weighted instead, etc ...

Of course there are very honorable people at EELV, but the major problem - and this concerns all political movements - is that to join a group of this kind is to adopt the ideology that goes with it. .
Except it appears that the "Greens" are not "ecologists" in the sense that one might think.
It is a party which inherits a libertaro-libertarian ideology which is fundamentally not compatible with true ecology.

A certain number of EELVs are defectors from the ultra left either directly or by ideological choice ... I would not name a name ...

What we can therefore criticize virulently for this political party is that it has swallowed up political ecology to reduce it to an ersatz hint of Trotskyism ...
Like the NPA or the Left Front, not to mention them, the anti-system vision it proposes is in fact only a variable of adjustment to a moralization of capitalism in the egalitarian-leftist style. ..

[Obamot]

Chatelot, you point to a major contradiction in our societies:

However, the economy is the main point of ecology! Aligning wishful thinking without the means to achieve is useless: all ecological decisions are also economical.

This economist vision is so pervasive that it contaminates all aspects of life and, you are right, this is how ecology, or rather its sad caricature, presents itself today.

Major contradiction, since this presupposes developing infinitely the causes of the alteration of nature, in an attempt to remedy it!
There is an aporia there which it seems impossible to escape! And yet, if there is an impasse, it is because the premises of reasoning are false.

Let us not count on the elected representatives of EELV, anesthetized by the gold of the Republic, to push the questioning on other foundations!

Forgive me Ahmed, but you make a contradiction of it simply because you postulate that the economy is synonymous with infinite development.

Thing that precisely Ahmed does not cease refuting.

Moderate