RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Boardman writes: "World 'leaders' hold world hostage, no release seen soon. Maybe that sub-head is too bleak, maybe it's unjustified, maybe there is an invisible political will to survive more than the next fiscal quarter or election."

Activists of global anti-poverty charity Oxfam, wearing masks depicting some of the world leaders, stage a protest ahead of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, known as the COP21 summit, in Paris, France, November 28, 2015. (photo: Benoit Tessier/Reuters)
Activists of global anti-poverty charity Oxfam, wearing masks depicting some of the world leaders, stage a protest ahead of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, known as the COP21 summit, in Paris, France, November 28, 2015. (photo: Benoit Tessier/Reuters)

Environmental Terrorists Meet in Paris

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

03 December 15


World “leaders” hold world hostage, no release seen soon

aybe that sub-head is too bleak, maybe it’s unjustified, maybe there is an invisible political will to survive more than the next fiscal quarter or election. If COP21, the UN climate conference that began November 30, actually manages to provide some reason to believe the world will not continue to stumble deliberately toward self-incineration, that would beat present expectations. But even that unlikely result would be far short of the profound changes needed to prevent the world from heating more than the 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) already considered inevitable – and calamitous.

COP21 stands for the 21st session of the Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an international treaty established in 1992 (at the Rio Earth Summit) “to consider what they could do to limit global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and to cope with its impacts.” Like the UN, UNFCCC is dominated by the richest and most powerful countries, whose perceived interests give little weight to the needs of the poorest or most vulnerable countries. 

That underlying structural problem of power imbalance is amplified at COP21 by sheer numbers. COP 21 has at least 36,276 registered individual participants. Of these, 23,161 people represent 198 countries (two of which are only observers). There are another 1,236 observer organizations, including 36 units of the UN, 71 intergovernmental organizations, and 1,109 non-governmental organizations, altogether represented by 9,411 people. And there are 1,366 media organizations with 3,704 registered participants. All of them (and all of us) will have to slog through jargon and Orwellian language which have the effect of obscuring meaning, not exposing it. 

The official goal of this gathering of world leaders is: “COP21, also known as the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, will, for the first time in over 20 years of UN negotiations, aim to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, with the aim of keeping global warming below 2°C.”

COP21 is theatre of the absurd, diverting the frogs as the water boils

What passes for global “leadership” has already pissed away more than three decades since climate change was identified as a clear and present danger to life on earth. Even now the world’s leaders appear content to lounge in their comfortable bubbles of denial of reality and conflicts of interest that reinforce that useful denial. We live in a time when shameful leaders almost everywhere appear to lack the capacity for shame, much less the capacity to change their shameful behavior.

They aim to achieve a legally binding agreement on climate? If they wanted a legally binding agreement, or even an agreement that worked, they would have had one long since. 

They aim to achieve a universal agreement on climate? They don’t need a universal agreement on climate, they need only to agree among the powerful few and the agreement would then be universal.  

Those making a globe-saving agreement unlikely, if not impossible, are the ones who brought the globe to the climate brink in the first place. These are the governments that have for decades subsidized their oil and coal companies, whose social conscience is exemplified by Exxon. Almost 40 years ago, in 1977, Exxon learned that carbon dioxide produced by burning oil and gas was warming the planet and could threaten humanity. Exxon immediately blew the whistle – on sharing that information. Continuing to accept government subsidies, Exxon poured millions of dollars into a decades-long disinformation campaign debunking the climate change it knew to be real. In effect, even after the government knew through other sources about global warming, government continued to subsidize Exxon’s possibly criminal lies to the government and the public. Forbes magazine defends Exxon, arguing that Exxon was right because global warming has increased more slowly than predicted by some.

Corporate polluters embedded in UNFCCC (go ahead, pronounce it)

Exxon and its ilk have long had a heavy hand in UN activities to address climate change and they arewell-represented at COP21. It is not in their interest to have the conference reach an enforceable and universal agreement, because most of their corporate assets are oil and coal in the ground and they can’t cash in on the value of those assets without burning them, no matter what they do to the planet. 

When a society, in this case a global society, sets out to confront criminal behavior, if they’re serious, they don’t convene a conference of criminals. Assuming that planetary destruction is at least a crime against humanity (this is controversial in some circles) what earthly sense does it make to have the world’s global plunderers, governmental and corporate, choose themselves to figure out how to reduce their plunder without reducing their profits and power?

Having absolute authority to take ameliorative steps on their own initiative, the plunderers swamp the credulous media with claims that an unwieldy conference with a track record of 23 years of failure is the only possible way to find a solution to the dangers of climate change. To emphasize that opinion, the plunderers exclude the most articulate voices against plunder from their conference. Those are the lucky ones. The less lucky are deposed by military coup and jailed, while the US is quick to recognize the coup government of the Maldives as it promptly issues offshore oil leases, showing their willingness to see their own people drown sooner or later. Like the Marshall Islands (under US “protection”), the Maldives are a looming test case of whether the world prefers long term humanity over short term profit. 

The Marshall Islands were the subject of a long, lavishly illustrated page one piece in the December 2 New York Times fatalistically headlined “Pacific Island Nation Struggles Against Relentless Rising Sea” (and worse online: “The Marshall Islands Are Disappearing”). The story is strangely disconnected from COP21, as if assuming there’s nothing that can be done to save the Marshall Islands. The Times even characterizes foreign minister Tony A. deBrum as somewhat unconcerned with saving his country:  

Mr. deBrum’s focus is squarely on the West’s wallets – recouping “loss and damage,” in negotiators’ parlance, for the destruction wrought by the rich nations’ industrial might on the global environment. Many other low-lying nations are just as threatened by rising seas.… But the Marshall Islands holds an important card: Under a 1986 compact, the roughly 70,000 residents of the Marshalls, because of their long military ties to Washington, are free to emigrate to the United States, a pass that will become more enticing as the water rises on the islands’ shores.

Speaking, as it typically does, in the voice of the plundering class, the Times frames the destruction of a sovereign nation in terms of issues that matter to the plunderers: they want our money, and they want to come here – the horror. But the full moral squalor of the Times as plunderer mouthpiece comes later. The Times describes neighborhoods in the Marshall Islands that already suffer periodic flooding with salt water and raw sewage, followed by sickness and disease, fever and dysentery, in a cycle that will only repeat more quickly as warming continues. Such health conditions would be forbidden in the US. The Times, sounding like Marie Antoinette with the monstrous detachment of the rich and unaffected, worries only that Marshall Islanders “could see their homes unfit for human habitation within the coming decades.”

“If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu”

The plunderers also ban peaceful protest against plundering, using the “terrorism” threat as an excuse to prevent protest against the eco-terrorism of the plunderers. When the plunderers’ gag on free speech is met with non-violent protest, the plunderers’ police respond with a violent put down and 200 arrests. This is Paris now. The local police state also used the “terrorism” smear to raid the homes of climate change activists, putting them in house arrest without charges. French President François Hollande, a head of a leading plunderer state, lied about the police actions this way:

This is why these protests are not authorized. We knew there would be troublemakers, who by the way have nothing to do with climate activists, or those who want the conference to succeed, and who are there only to create problems. That’s why they were put under house arrest. And it’s doubly unfortunate, I’d even say scandalous, Place de la Republique, where there are all these flowers and also candles placed in memory of those who were killed by the bullets of terrorists.

While Hollande’s first remarks are commonly dishonest, unprovable smears of unnamed and uncharged citizens, his last remark is a callous, demagogic lie. Video of the police attack shows that the memorial at the Place de la Republique was protected by the protesters and trashed by the police.

As with past UN climate meetings, peaceful protesters have been kept away from the eyes and ears of registered participants. What does it say about the participants’ arguments about climate change to see that they need police to protect them from counter-arguments? As one protester said, commenting on their exclusion from any meaningful part in the process: “If you’re not at the table, you are on the menu. So, we want to be at the table.”

Do the people at the table care what happens after they’re dead?

If the people at the table actually thought and felt in global terms, if they actually thought and felt in generational terms, they could not possibly act as they do, fecklessly, ineffectively, self-servingly and soullessly. Their terrorism is magnitudes larger than the “terrorism” they pretend to “protect” us against with their creeping totalitarian controls. If it were otherwise, there would not be so many casualties among climate change action advocates. Another such excluded expert is Pablo Solon, a former chief negotiator for Bolivia, now denied a seat at the table. He went to Paris to protest against the scripted charade of COP21, where there is no negotiation of unenforceable national promises to reduce emissions. Perhaps the conference would be better named COP-OUT21, if Solon is right:  

There is an official document from the UNFCCC that says,… we are going to be increasing the temperature between 2.7 to 3.9 degrees Celsius…. And now to be speaking about [global warming of] four degrees or five degrees Celsius is, to put it in other terms, to burn the planet. So the Paris agreement is an agreement that will see the planet burn.

For that prediction to be wrong, our global “leaders” need to change their behavior in radical ways that they have so far shown every intention of resisting. More likely Paris is another sham. It’s as if a ship captain with a vessel taking on water demands that the crew bail faster, and viciously punishes anyone trying to plug the hole. Faced with the need to reverse course to avoid calamity, the captains of our ships of state have gathered to discuss only the possibility of slowing down, while maintaining the same course.

  • 50% of the world’s population, the poorer half, cause only 10% of greenhouse gas emissions.

  • 10% of the world’s population, the richest 10%, cause almost 50% of greenhouse gas emissions.   

The plunderers show little interest in sacrificing their wealth to save the poor, or the planet. Among US presidential candidates so far, only Bernie Sanders has acknowledged that climate change is the most serious national security issue this (or any other) country faces. His campaign is predicated on the possibility of a political revolution from below, which might allow the possibility of US actions consistent with protecting the planet. It’s not that the ways to protect the planet are unknown or unachievable. But the best ways to protect the planet – especially keeping fossil fuels in the ground – are fundamentally unacceptable to those whose present interests are in conflict with efforts to keep the planet from burning. And the plunderers still control the game at the top.

William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+16 # marind 2015-12-03 11:28
The French government would do well to remember 1792.
+29 # wantrealdemocracy 2015-12-03 14:21
The American government would do well to remember 1776 when we had the first American revolution for democracy. Time for us to do it again when our 'leaders' attend the "Conference of Criminals".

This is only one of the actions of our current government that are not in keeping with the will of the people of this nation. Who wants these endless wars and the austerity programs and the attack on our civil rights? Do you know anyone who supports the drone bombing? the cuts in food stamps for our poor families while we up the funds sent to Israel to kill Palestinians? Who wants for profit health care?

I don't think our current government is 'our government" in any way. It belongs to the corporations who fund their campaigns.
+16 # John Puma 2015-12-03 13:30
Quote re Exxon: " ... they can’t cash in on the value of those (fossil fuel) assets without burning them."

Let's be perfectly clear: Exxon sells the assets, WE burn them.
+9 # WBoardman 2015-12-03 21:11
Of course John Puma is correct (if picky),
since it's hard to imagine Exxon selling its assets
if no one was going to burn them....

WE would not burn them if we had alternatives.

EXXON has worked long and hard to deny us alternatives.

Exxon is the enemy, we are the collateral damage.
+13 # cecilepineda 2015-12-03 14:44
Solution: we stop burning FF to make the 1% rich and unaccountable. We power down. We switch to alternatives, ditch dirty energy . Check out Arcadia Power as a possible solution. We read: Apology to a Whale: Words to MEND a World. We think, and then we ACT.
1776 here we come!
+20 # newell 2015-12-03 14:46
hillary won't do anything. the "ready-for-heav en-prime-time republicans" will make things worse. work for bernie or your kids/grandkids are toast.
+12 # RMDC 2015-12-03 14:57
It has been stated many, many times that energy corporations will not on their own make the shift away from carbon based fuel to renewable fuels. They won't make that sort of capital investment for fear that the corps which don't make the investment will make more profits. So the only chance for a massive shift to renewable fuel is for government to make the commitment. And it pretty much has to be a world-wide commitment.

China leads the world in the move to renewable fuel. China is bringing the costs of solar energy down.

I think -- or at least as far as I am aware -- that it is now economically and technically possible to make a massive shift to renewable fuel. It was not 10 years ago. The only hold up now is governments and their protection of old technology of burning oil, coal, and gas.
+4 # maverita 2015-12-04 07:19
If we can't get it done here, I would be happy to buy solar panels that were made in china. it is coming fast and we need to get the heck out of the middle east and create a new, less vulnerable, powergrid that can meter power in AND out. If we put that much money toward helping and strengthening our own country, if youth here are employed and given opportunities, fewer young people will search for meaning in all the wrong places. If our country really did try to lead by example...
+15 # RMDC 2015-12-03 14:58
I agree with Boardman's point -- governments are the problem. They've been standing in the way for 30 years.
+6 # reiverpacific 2015-12-03 15:28
Hollande in particular should recall the prescient statement of Louis XV (or Marquise de Pompadour), who could feel stirrings of populist revolution" Aprés MOI (or nous) lé déluge".
And you know what happened to his successor(s)!
+8 # 2015-12-03 15:33
and then there's james hansen telling us to building HUNDREDS of nukes, which will destroy the planet even faster.
+6 # REDPILLED 2015-12-03 15:46
So disappointing that Hansen has gone over to the Nuke Side.
+4 # tanis 2015-12-03 16:01
Too bad the COP21 isn't being held in southern India where flood waters hold forth.
+7 # Woratnac 2015-12-03 16:31
Brilliant, excoriating article! I'd just have added this phrase: high crimes against all life on the planet. The human experiment, as the legendary biologist Ernst Mayr observed, is nearing its end. A species' lifetime is generally 100,000 years and
we are at that point. Unfortunately, our species is not only the only one capable of ratiocination - based on understanding cause and effect - but is also the only one with a limitless appetite for aggression and with no inbuilt brakes on territorial dominance.
+4 # PABLO DIABLO 2015-12-03 19:10
Time for the Supreme Court to step in and "select" Trump to be sure W.Bush/Obama policies as President are continued until they work.
+5 # Hooligan 2015-12-04 01:56
RMDC:Yes, it is definitely technically and economically feasible.Stanfo rd has plans for all 50 states to be on 100% renewableshttps ://news.stanfor r-50states-rene wable-energy-06 0815.html
+3 # RMDC 2015-12-04 11:23
Thanks and thanks for the link. I thought this was so. But why is this not news that is wall to wall on all media. Why is it not coming out of the mouths of all politicians every day. It is a matter of social momentum and inevitability. Of course, we know why and Boardman's article is about why.

The world will probably leave the US behind. Then there will be a massive catch up campaign with trillions of dollars being given to corporations for research and development already done in other nations.
+1 # cordleycoit 2015-12-05 20:05
As long as the Silent majority stays silent we will be ruled by power mad ?Sons Of Trump, SOTs and other mad men.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.