A message to 10:10 -"sorry", just doesn't cut it

WillR says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:48 am

From the link:

—Franny Armstrong, founder of 10:10[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film]
There is more than a little parallel with the extermination of the “undesirables” during the Nazi era when virtual “killing” of five people or “amputation” is justified by the imaginary deaths of 300,000. The Jews and other “undesirables” were also falsely accused of great crimes before they were brutalized. This is how it starts: one small outrageous step at a time. At any point, the process can theoretically be stopped by people with morals and backbone, but each such little step is trivialized as “humor” or it isn’t given the importance it deserves (i.e. the public condemnation), because each such step is deliberately small, yet the goalposts get gradually and inexorably moved (or I should say the out-of-bounds lines) until all sorts of evil is firmly within bounds and justified by unimaginable (and false) accusations of harm being done by the intended targets. Dehumanization is essential to the process. The brutalization during the Nazi era could not have been carried out on the scale that it happened without this essential dehumanizing process. There are (thankfully) generally few people vile enough to do something like this when they consider the victims as fellow humans. The rest of us need to be brainwashed first to consider the victims as non-human or having committed great crimes in order to overcome the natural revulsion that normal human beings feel when doing something like this, either virtually as in this case or in reality as during the Nazi era.
This is NOT some small thing that is happening and it is NOT due to a few radicals or people who have lost their moral compasses. It needs to be understood as a vital cog in the process of POLITICAL elimination of all dissent. When people with dissenting viewpoints are admitted as equals, both academically and humanly, the political (in this case global) brainwashing using exaggerated models based on manipulated data of questionable quality cannot continue. The public at large will demand better data and more realistic and supportable evidence, before allowing this process to continue.
So, step 1 is to paint dissenters as unreasonable, hence the use of the label “deniers.” With this film, we see step 2 of the process, which is to dehumanize dissenters or even anyone not willing to join in enthusiastically (witness the end of the short film, where IIRC the actress playing the part of the teacher in the scene where the children get blown up is herself blown up because she thought that lending support for the cause was enough). Step 3 is the passing of regulations mandating everone’s active participation. Step 4 is elevating violations of such regulations to criminal status. Step 5 is increasingly aggressive criminal enforcement of regulations with forcible detention and imprisonment of those that in step one were labeled as “deniers” that didn’t enthusiastically “mend their ways.” There is no end to this process, as it becomes ever more restrictive and punitive. The whole process, once it is set in motion, succumbs to one of the general failings of governments: that is, that there is no good idea that will not be taken to its most costly and punitive extreme.

Wouldn’t the easiest way, in the US, to get a general 10% carbon reduction be to stop mixing ethanol with our gasoline at a 10% ratio? I think we would all appreciate the better gas mileage, cheaper gas, and lower prices for various foodstuffs as much as the vague feeling in our gut that may be the good will from the greens for reducing carbon emissions.
One could stop ethanol deliveries for local mixing in 24hrs, have no effect on the vehicle fleet, and start geting your carbon back as soon as everyone has to fill-up again. Just asking – no pressure.

My apologies to all for bad html. Hopefully, this will come through better without missing essential text.
WillR says:
October 1, 2010 at 10:48 am

We greatly value your contributions and the tremendous enthusiasm and professionalism you brought to the project.
Professionalism would have guaranteed a halt to the project.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10:10
..and therein you can find a list of people to complain to!

From the link, Franny Armstrong, founder of 10:10 states:[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film]:

Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?” […] “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change

There is more than a little parallel with the extermination of the “undesirables” during the Nazi era when virtual “killing” of five people or “amputation” is justified by the imaginary deaths of 300,000. The Jews and other “undesirables” were also falsely accused of great crimes before they were brutalized. This is how it starts: one small outrageous step at a time. At any point, the process can theoretically be stopped by people with morals and backbone, but each such little step is trivialized as “humor” or it isn’t given the importance it deserves (i.e. the public condemnation), because each such step is deliberately small, yet the goalposts get gradually and inexorably moved (or I should say the out-of-bounds lines) until all sorts of evil is firmly within bounds and justified by unimaginable (and false) accusations of harm being done by the intended targets. Dehumanization is essential to the process. The brutalization during the Nazi era could not have been carried out on the scale that it happened without this essential dehumanizing process. There are (thankfully) generally few people vile enough to do something like this when they consider the victims as fellow humans. The rest of us need to be brainwashed first to consider the victims as non-human or having committed great crimes in order to overcome the natural revulsion that normal human beings feel when doing something like this, either virtually as in this case or in reality as during the Nazi era.
This is NOT some small thing that is happening and it is NOT due to a few radicals or people who have lost their moral compasses. It needs to be understood as a vital cog in the process of POLITICAL elimination of all dissent. When people with dissenting viewpoints are admitted as equals, both academically and humanly, the political (in this case global) brainwashing using exaggerated models based on manipulated data of questionable quality cannot continue. The public at large will demand better data and more realistic and supportable evidence, before allowing this process to continue.
So, step 1 is to paint dissenters as unreasonable, hence the use of the label “deniers.” With this film, we see step 2 of the process, which is to dehumanize dissenters or even anyone not willing to join in enthusiastically (witness the end of the short film, where IIRC the actress playing the part of the teacher in the scene where the children get blown up is herself blown up because she thought that lending support for the cause was enough). Step 3 is the passing of regulations mandating everone’s active participation. Step 4 is elevating violations of such regulations to criminal status. Step 5 is increasingly aggressive criminal enforcement of regulations with forcible detention and imprisonment of those that in step one were labeled as “deniers” that didn’t enthusiastically “mend their ways.” There is no end to this process, as it becomes ever more restrictive and punitive. The whole process, once it is set in motion, succumbs to one of the general failings of governments: that is, that there is no good idea that will not be taken to its most costly and punitive extreme.