Urban Green Fair is go. Brockwell Park Sunday 9th Sept

[co-op]

Yes, I was at that too.

Well I don't quite roll my eyes at it. Obviously there are a lot of nutters running around this subject but I thought the film just about managed to stay on the credible side of the line...

But the leaflet about climate change being a secret govt conspiracy too rather turned me off.

 

[Brainaddict]

Well I don't quite roll my eyes at it. Obviously there are a lot of nutters running around this subject but I thought the film just about managed to stay on the credible side of the line...

I disagree. Even that stuff about the timing of the bbc announcement of the collapse of WTC7 didn't stand up to the simplest logical reasoning. Let's leave aside the fact that the bbc have explained how it happened (it's on their website somewhere still) and focus on the fact that if you were organising a conspiracy as proposed, the role of the media would be to act as the 'objective observers' who would make the whole thing convincing.
The last thing you would be doing would be feeding information to them (either with or without their collusion) that would risk revealing the whole conspiracy. Sure you might kill them if they got close to the truth, but feed them info? Why? It's their job to observe events and report them - so why would you feel the need to tell them what was going on, thus risking the whole operation? It doesn't even make sense - unless you already believe there was a conspiracy and are looking for 'evidence' to support your belief.

 

[Brainaddict]

Oops, derailing here.

It was a nice green fair

 

[co-op]

Oops, derailing here.

It was a nice green fair

That's ok, I don't recall the BBC thing as being a big deal in the film (and I simply can't be bothered to find out enough about WTC7 to have a clue if it's relevant). My recollection of the film was that they tended to emphasise the qui bono aspect of 9/11 and that does set up some interesting questions - but I get my 9/11 films/books/bulletin boards etc etc all slightly mixed into one pile in my mind so maybe I am giving the film too much credit.

 

[steve indigenou]

If it's a bit of fun in Brockwell park for people already sympathetic to the "green" cause and interested in hearing people talk about a few other issues as well, then that's fine, although as far as the green message is concerned, it's mainly a case of preaching to the converted.

This has always been one of the biggest problems with certain sections of the Green scene, particularly the Brixton one. It seems to me the most successful Green thinkers / leaders are the ones who are most accessible to the wider audience. Being too closely associated with people who appear to be a bit mad (and there are plenty of them in the Green movement) is likely to alienate people who would otherwise be persuaded by the science and the economics. It's hard enough to persuade people to forgoe their immediate self-interest without giving them a ready made sub-conscious excuse for not doing so.

I also think that serious questions have to be asked about whether Lambeth Council are alienated in a similar fashion. What language is used and what causes are advanced will impact heavily on the willingness of council officers and politicians to support or oppose. When I heard about the posters coming down, it seemed very fishy. Lambeth have not exactly been supportive in the past, so it would not surprise me if there was something underlying the posters coming down.

My experience of a few Green events, particularly the Big Green Gathering and others run by the same small group of Green event organisers is that they are very ghettoised, with the same people doing the same things year in year out As such it doesn't seem to move forward. Hippy / new age costume and rhetoric may sell well internally but it does down terribly externally, at least in certain circles (as we know only too well !). Thinking more about this issu of 'positioning' would help in the future.

I also think that the vision of a society in which we are all making our own beer, growing our own veg etc is not a very attractive one for many people, akin to the mud-huts, future primitive ideological bent of some. A more high-tech, specialised division of labour is both more likely and more saleable. There are people and thinkers out there, such as the New Economics Foundation, the Centre for Alternative Techology and so on, who are doing this thinking. A bigger prescence for them would help the event be taken more seriously.

As for the 9/11 conspiracies, the people who say that there are more important things to focus on are probably right. You don't need a 9/11 conspiracy to show that the neo-cons and neo-liberals are fucking it up. Resources spent promoting conspiracy theories of limited relevance are wasted resources, better spent elsewhere, unless that is the priority is entertaining a bunch of hippes in a field rather than acheiving meaningful social change.

 

[steve indigenou]

Chomsky's position on 9/11 conspiracies is a very interesting one :

http://www.oilempire.us/chomsky.html.

As are the positions of those who criticise him of not supporting conspiracies as being 'worse than the CIA'.

 

[gabi]

Awesome.

I love the way a good thread about the best free festival this year has been derailed by 9/11. Awesome guys. Good work.

 

[editor]

Awesome.

I love the way a good thread about the best free festival this year has been derailed by 9/11. Awesome guys. Good work.

It's what they're good at!

Some of the London TROOFERS have even taken to trashing 7/7 survivors' meetings in the past too.

Self-obsessed, sick cunts.

 

[editor]

You don't need a 9/11 conspiracy to show that the neo-cons and neo-liberals are fucking it up. Resources spent promoting conspiracy theories of limited relevance are wasted resources, better spent elsewhere, unless that is the priority is entertaining a bunch of hippes in a field rather than acheiving meaningful social change.

You make some valid points there Steve, but to some people projects like the Synergy Project look more about entertaining a bunch of hippies rather than achieving meaningful social change too.

Really. Honestly.

 

[steve indigenou]

Yes Editor,

particularly if you make a distinction between the Synergy Centre (which I am involved in) which does meaningful work in our local community and the Synergy Project (which I resigned from over a year ago), which doesn't.

As I tried to explain before, I actually supported some of the criticisms made on U75 of the overly airy-fairy, hippy-dippy content and rhetoric of the Synergy Project, though it was mixed up with some unjustified criticisms too. But one of the reasons I resigned from the Project was I felt it wasn't achieving much after they decided to cut off funding from the Centre so they could earn more for themselves. Hippy dippy rhetoric became a substitute for action there as well (and still is in my opinion), as I believe it does in other sections of the Green Ghetto.

One could delve into the history of Synergy further (but here is most definitely not the place), but it's interesting to see that we agree on some issues, agreement that can become apparent if sectarian hostilities can be ceased for a moment.

 

[gabi]

It's what they're good at!

Some of the London TROOFERS have even taken to trashing 7/7 survivors' meetings in the past too.

Self-obsessed, sick cunts.

U havent exactly been using the old 'starve em of oxygen' thing boss..

Theyre fools, ignore em, they'll move on.

 

[editor]

One could delve into the history of Synergy further (but here is most definitely not the place), but it's interesting to see that we agree on some issues, agreement that can become apparent if sectarian hostilities can be ceased for a moment.

OK, fair enough, let's move on, although - be honest - some of your earlier post was a wee pop at your auld arch-enemy, no?

 

[editor]

U havent exactly been using the old 'starve em of oxygen' thing boss..

Then I get accused of being:

(a) an evil censor
(b) in the employ of the CIA

 

[steve indigenou]

The problem with making criticisms of auld-enemies is that people might mistake them for 'wee pops' rather than legitimate criticisms.

I was conscious that they might be interpreted as such, but I think that these criticisms about positioning, ghettoisation and preaching to the converted are not ones that I alone am making - hence my quote of an earlier poster at the beginning of my initial post. They are criticisms that others make, not just of the Brixton Green Scene but also of the Big Green Gathering, the Kingston Green Fair, the Green Futures Field at Glastonbury and so on. Sam Hermitage who does these other three events / fields is as open to these criticisms as is Shane.

There is a certain culture within certain sections of the the Green Movement which is actually quite conservative - perhaps borne out of the comfy, middle class backgrounds that many Greens come from (including me!). Making your own beer and growing your own veg is hardly radical politics. What frustrates me is that there is some radical political and economic debate going on in Green circles, but some Green event organisers are a little too parochial to engage with it.

I had a conversation with one of the other people who I am reasonably confident was involved in the UGG and he was saying he was frustrated that the approach was not more inclusive. I think that if there were more local community groups, NGOs etc involved, the Council would be much more supportive than they are, or appear to be. If you had a broad cross section of Lambeth civil society involved in an UGG, the Council would fear a backlash against a licence refusal. As it is, a few marginalised Greens are not going to cause any serious problems politically.

It boils down to how Green politics is packaged. If it is wrapped up in hippy-dippy rhetoric, new age bollocks, angry-protest and conspiracy theory, you can kiss wider support good-bye. But if you package it in terms of 'social cohesion', 'neighbourhood renewal', 'environmental sustainability' and all the topical policy terminology, show the council how it can deliver 'social outputs' or be seen to be a cultural leader by supporting the event, then you stand a much better chance. But this requires reading up on the social policy and cultivating rlationships with council departments and officers in order to be taken seriously by them.

In my experience, the Brixton scene was more focussed on dope-smoking and self-romanticisation as eco-warriors to be arsed to do the mudane ground-work to make this possible.

 

[editor]

In my experience, the Brixton scene was more focussed on dope-smoking and self-romanticisation as eco-warriors to be arsed to do the mudane ground-work to make this possible.

That certainly wasn't the case in the Cooltan days but I think you'd agree the general level of political activism is at a real low point at the moment.

The anti-climax of the anti war march combined with all this terrorism shit seems to have delivered a massive body blow to activism.

 

[rich!]

But this requires reading up on the social policy and cultivating rlationships with council departments and officers in order to be taken seriously by them.

In my experience, the Brixton scene was more focussed on dope-smoking and self-romanticisation as eco-warriors to be arsed to do the mudane ground-work to make this possible.

In other words, those fucking hippies have fucked the planet.

Again.

 

[rich!]

The anti-climax of the anti war march combined with all this terrorism shit seems to have delivered a massive body blow to activism.

Although, I see a lot of engineering and design professional literature, and there's more creative Green (Viridian-style) work going on than I ever expected to see in my lifetime.

 

[teuchter]

It boils down to how Green politics is packaged. If it is wrapped up in hippy-dippy rhetoric, new age bollocks, angry-protest and conspiracy theory, you can kiss wider support good-bye. But if you package it in terms of 'social cohesion', 'neighbourhood renewal', 'environmental sustainability' and all the topical policy terminology, show the council how it can deliver 'social outputs' or be seen to be a cultural leader by supporting the event, then you stand a much better chance. But this requires reading up on the social policy and cultivating rlationships with council departments and officers in order to be taken seriously by them.

Don't think you necessarily have to wrap it up in silly political catchphrases either. I think that if you can convincingly demonstrate to people that, for example:

- Overwhelming scientific evidence indicates that climate change is going to happen and is going to cause problems
- Scientific evidence also demonstrates we are responsible for it and are therefore able to do something about it
- You can help do something about it without radically changing your lifestyle
- There are things you can do that might even be economically beneficial to you

then you are making progress. These are simple, pragmatic facts, which, if people are aware of them and believe them, then mainstream society might start to make changes. 10 million people improving their energy efficiency by fitting a new boiler will make much more real difference than 1000 people keeping their own chickens or brewing their own beer.

But like I said above, if the urban green fair is more about a bit of fun than singing the praises of condensing boilers, that's fine, as long as no-one's kidding themselves that that kind of event is ever going to have an impact on mainstream society and the way it lives.

 

[steve indigenou]

as long as no-one's kidding themselves that that kind of event is ever going to have an impact on mainstream society and the way it lives

Exactly.

Although the phrases I cited are exactly the kind that are used in council regeneration, environmental and cultural services departments. Using them in proposals shows you have bothered to read the social policy and as the social policy is written by people who see themselves as acting in the wider public interest it serves to press useful buttons.

The fact that Ghettoised Greens don't bother to read the policy shows that perhaps they aren't actually interested in what the wider mainstream is up to or that they simply can't be bothered to find out. As you point out, Green ideas that were fringe 15 years ago are becoming increasingly mainstream, it's a shame that some can't take advantage of this but continue to participate in their own marginalisation.

But I think it's true that the UGG was more about having a good time, and as such I'm sure it was a great success.

 

[co-op]

It's what they're good at!

Some of the London TROOFERS have even taken to trashing 7/7 survivors' meetings in the past too.

Self-obsessed, sick cunts.

Um, as a new poster I don't know the history of this subject on these boards and it sounds like it got good and heated. But on this thread it looks to me, from the outside as t'were, like the subject just got a few passing mentions, none of them particularly insane and all quite polite (it was interesting to me that even Chomsky thinks the 9/11 conspiracists are talking rubbish, I think he can get a bit knee-jerk himself).

But the anti-troofers are twitching, spluttering and generally touretteing in a manner more reminiscent of the loony conspiracy theorists they want to be so different from.

Just a thought. .

 

[teuchter]

The fact that Ghettoised Greens don't bother to read the policy shows that perhaps they aren't actually interested in what the wider mainstream is up to or that they simply can't be bothered to find out. As you point out, Green ideas that were fringe 15 years ago are becoming increasingly mainstream, it's a shame that some can't take advantage of this but continue to participate in their own marginalisation.

I guess the problem is that a lot of people get involved with "green" campaigning not just because they feel strongly about the issues, but because they enjoy the radicalism in itself. They like to use the "green" thing as a way as marking themselves out as being separate from mainstream society, in a rebellious teenager kind of way. Obviously, someone coming from this starting point is by definition going to have some problems with presenting their thoughts in such a way that they appeal to a wider audience, because by being successful in doing so they remove teir own distinctiveness.

I'm a little bit guilty of it myself, if I'm honest. I've had a general non-flying policy for five or six years now, and it used to be that when I explained that I avoided flying on environmental grounds I was met with baffled looks and a chance to elaborate on my "radical" ways - now it's the issue of the moment it's not nearly so much fun.

This problem affects lots of causes, not just the green movement, of course.

 

[rich!]

I guess the problem is that a lot of people get involved with "green" campaigning not just because they feel strongly about the issues, but because they enjoy the radicalism in itself. They like to use the "green" thing as a way as marking themselves out as being separate from mainstream society, in a rebellious teenager kind of way.

Emo Green - the new Goth.

"no mum, I don't want to go on holiday wiv the family because of *flaps arms* enviwomunt! mum! enviwomunt! *shakes fringe* mum! you don't no nuffing mum! *stomps off to bedroom*"