Our government over in the UK hasn’t done very well. Setting lofty target to be the best in the EU then planning to build yet another terminal at Heathrow. I did read once that carbon emitted so high in the atmosphere isn’t as bad but this can’t be true can it? I would have thought that dumping it that high up immediately increases the greenhouse effect. Would love to know…

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/03/jeff_bingaman_perfects_the_art_of_the_conditional_sellout.php

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/23/2453808.htm

I must be reading you wrong. In your @30 post, you only mentioned civil disobedience and @34 gave a wiki link wherein law breaking is implicit. You made no reference to passive civil disobedience until @38.

Yep, I marched the streets of Sydney in protest against the Vietnam war (my mate was killed – he was ‘called up’). Would I have been a ‘conscientious objector’ and broke the law? Probably, but I will never know – I wasn’t called up.

I will be in Canberra, again protesting and walking the walk – but I can tell you now, I will not be partaking in civil disobedience – passive or aggressive – particularly since the laws I am concerned about have not been enacted. If and when they are, I may change my mind to “passive” civil disobedience.

But and until such time, I don’t want to inflame the ‘climate change onlookers’ (we need them) and turn them away from what I see as a very ‘soft’ approach to what Australia could do now, but must do much more post Copenhagen 2009.

http://stepitupaustralia.wordpress.com/2008/12/22/sixty-people-occupy-sharon-griersons-office/

http://www.getup.org.au/

Come on people – get involved!

An unnecessary and unjustifiable war at a cost of three trillion dollars; a crashing economy at a cost of trillions more; a degraded environment, a dissipated Earth…….priceless.

And people responsible for these nightmares want their 2008 bonuses……predictable.

I respect and admire Gandhi as much as anyone in what he achieved (and how he did it) for the people of India … and for that matter, Pakistan. However, I agree with Mark above.

In advocating civil disobedience, what laws do you see being broken? Indeed, some of the ‘laws’ you would be campaigning against have not even been passed or enacted yet.

Both you and I know global warming is real and humanity has been complicit in its severity (notwithstanding you have previously pigeon-holed me in the ‘denialist’ camp). Nevertheless, adapting to climate change, and mitigating against GHG emissions, rests in the hands of politicians and economists.

Don’t get me wrong, a ground swell of action and support from us mere mortals is important, but it has to be predicated on a rational and coordinated plan. I am sure Barry would have much more to say on this and he may do so, if not now then certainly during the summit.

Notwithstanding, Rudd is a very astute politician – it makes no sense to antagonise the very people/groups (AGW agnostics, deniers, people who just don’t know or who are just afraid of the consequences, etc) you are trying to get to walk the walk with you. Of course he has to take a “measured” response, particularly in the lead-up to Copenhagen.

We (the world) can look forward to the day when the Obama Administration comes into office with its proactive policies on climate change, science and technology (Chu, Holdren and Lubchenco appointments are a great start). Indeed, it would not surprise me if China and India comes on board soon after – time will tell.

In the mean time (and I do empathise with Garnaut) a political strategy is required that would put pressure on the coalition to lay their cards on the table.

I have much respect for the Greens (the light ones anyway) and hopefully they can have more say in the Senate. However, at the end of the day, it will be either a Labor or Liberal/National government … I know which would have better climate change policies.

One can only hope that after 2012, the world’s governments will be more willing to make meaningful emission reductions, to the levels expected by you, Rudd and Garnaut alike. Cheers.

Can you ever be sure that you are justified in breaking laws enacted on the basis of the will of the majority of the people? At what point can you decide that that is preferable to trying to change that will? The trouble with the former is the high probability that it will get you further away from achieving the latter.

DavidK – sometimes “passive” civil disobedience is the only way to effect change when democracy fails. It has some highly esteemed advocates (see Wiki article) including Gandhi.