Konstantin Kisin | This House Believes Woke Culture Has Gone Too Far – 7/8 | Oxford Union (via Climate Change)



OxfordUnion

Oxford Union on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theoxfordunion

Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion

Website: http://www.oxford-union.org/

Initially used as a term to empower awareness of systemic inequalities in society, wokeism is now a deeply divisive term. The media’s perpetuation of woke culture has made this term a buzzword. For some, being woke is part of the antidote of acknowledging the instruments of oppression. For others, it is a dangerously absolutist ideology, a sort of reverse McCarthyism, corroding liberal society and encouraging self-imposed victimhood. Is the ‘war on woke’ a legitimate phenomenon, or a reactionary distraction from the real problems being ‘woke’ addresses?

ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world’s most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

4.8 19 votes
Article Rating
39 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Richards
January 14, 2023 10:24 pm

A very good speaker

Douglas
January 14, 2023 10:26 pm

Excellent address by Konstantin.
Toby Young 3/8 also for the affirmative proposition is also worth viewing in this debate.
Interested in the outcome.

Stuart Baeriswyl
January 14, 2023 10:40 pm

What this Mr. Kisin said is quite correct. I think perhaps something like 80% of the world’s population is outside our western bubble; not blessed with general personal freedoms and not having so many physical comforts. Worrying over a “climate crisis” (that doesn’t really exist btw) would be a luxury for many people around the world. Many of us are quite spoiled and ungrateful for the God given blessings that we have.

commieBob
Reply to  Stuart Baeriswyl
January 15, 2023 6:43 am

Many of us are quite spoiled and ungrateful for the God given blessings that we have.

Most of us in the West live better than the kings and emperors of yore. Most folks appear to be oblivious to that fact.

As a society we are very egalitarian (where I live at least) … except for the woke, who are totalitarian pigs, quite similar to China’s Red Guard. When I was young, we aspired to a colour blind society and we were mostly achieving it. Then the woke came along and made skin colour the only thing that matters.

MarkW
Reply to  commieBob
January 15, 2023 7:38 am

The vast majority of income inequality is due to personal choices.

Richard Greene
Reply to  MarkW
January 16, 2023 12:07 am

Nonsense
People differ greatly in skills, abilities, ambition and general intelligence. And nations differ greatly in economic systems that encourage (or discourage) economic growth and/or personal growth, with redistribution of wealth schemes and welfare programs.

commieBob
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 16, 2023 4:01 am

You’re both right.

People are limited by the choices available to them. For instance, someone with an IQ of 85 isn’t going to get into med school and become a brain surgeon.

On the other hand, in Sweden, where women are more free to do anything than anywhere else, they choose stereotypically female jobs; even more so than places where they are supposedly less free.

kenji
January 14, 2023 11:19 pm

A woman, whom I quite admire, reminds us that what we need in the complacent, spoiled, West … is a good famine. A famine … a pestilence … or even a real nice thermonuclear world war … to remind us of what our dreaded forefathers annnnnnd foremothers have built for us. A nice famine to kick some sense right into our teeth. And “woke” would get so far behind us in the rear view mirror that it wouldn’t even be a faded memory. The spoilt children of wokity need a serious famine. And almost as if on cue … our current incompetent “leaders” appear to be forging one as I type this.

Barnes Moore
Reply to  kenji
January 15, 2023 5:54 am

A good freeze this winter in New England may wake a few people up – but given the depth of the blind ideology that exists in states like MA, I have my doubts. It seems that Germany is slowly waking up, but still peddles the nut-zero nonsense. According to an article on WUWT or someplace – could not quickly find it – coal accounted for something like 6-8% of electricity production in 2016. Today, it is up to 31%. If these numbers are wrong, I am sure someone reading this can correct them. But, I think the point is the same – wind and solar are complete failures whereas coal is not. Germany is dismantling a wind farm to make way for increased coal mining and is leveling an abandoned village (except for the envro-nazis squatters) for the same reason.

Anyway, a good hard freeze in the US northeast this winter could result in severe energy shortages do the political stupidity of limiting access to natural gas. Of course, Putin will be peddled by the media as the scapegoat – mainly because Russian LNG tankers will not likely arrive in Boston Harbor this winter.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Barnes Moore
January 15, 2023 10:11 am

According to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022 coal provided 36% of world electricity production in 2021 and was the dominant fuel for power production generation.

Wind and Solar by contrast provided just over 10%.

Richard Greene
Reply to  kenji
January 16, 2023 12:10 am

“The spoilt children of wokity need a serious famine.”

Hold on please — the leftists are working on ruining the electric grids first. Next, they can work on ruining food production. There is so much leftists can ruin at one time — they’ll get to the food supply, so just relax until then. One industry at a time!

John V. Wright
January 14, 2023 11:20 pm

Yes, a very good and entertaining speech. I would, however, make two points about it:

  1. Britain does not contribute 2% of global CO2. The figure is 0.000012%. The BBC makes sure that British people never read or hear about this figure.
  2. His point about the dwindling numbers of polar bears, although meant in jest, is not (as we all know) true. After all, one of our favourite quotes is “When Al Gore was born there were just 7,000 polar bears; today, only 30,000 remain…”
Stuart Baeriswyl
Reply to  John V. Wright
January 14, 2023 11:30 pm

…right, his comment on polar bears diminishing didn’t sound right to me from what I’ve read anyways; and he was just quipping anyways.

kenji
Reply to  John V. Wright
January 15, 2023 12:26 am

But, but, but … all those petrol cars and trucks clogging the M6 ? Ohhhhh mommmmaaaa

michel
Reply to  John V. Wright
January 15, 2023 2:21 am

Britain does not contribute 2% of global CO2. The figure is 0.000012%

This is flat wrong.

Britain emits about 450 million tons a year, out of a global total of about 37 billion tons. That’s about 1.2%. Sometimes people include the emissions on imported goods, which would raise the percentage to about 2%.

You arrive at 0.000012% by taking the annual UK emissions as a percent of the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. This is a nonsensical proceeding.

Yes, every year the UK emits 0.000012% of the amount of CO2 which is in the global atmosphere.

But every year it also emits 1.2% of total global emissions in that year.

Do the same silly arithmetic with China’s annual emissions of 11 billion tons, and you will start arguing that China does not do one third of annual emissions, no, its annual emissions are a tiny proportion of total atmospheric CO2.

Global ppm is now 421. Each ppm amounts to 7.82 gigatonnes of CO2. So do the multiplication and you end up with 3,292 gigatonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere at the moment. Chinese emissions are about 11 billion tons a year, and you will start claiming China only emits 0.3% of global emissions!

In fact, you will end up claiming that the world taken together only emits a couple of percent of global emissions! The 37 billion global annual emissions are only about 1% of the 3,292 gigatonnes in the atmosphere. Its a nonsense way of proceeding.

The UK emits about 1-2% of global emissions, and China about 30%, and that’s all there is to it.

Tom Johnson
Reply to  michel
January 15, 2023 5:15 am

Britain does not contribute 2% of global CO2. The figure is 0.000012%.

This is an accurate statement.

Your reply: “every year it also emits 1.2% of total global emissions in that year.” is also an accurate statement.

You are arguing semantics, not facts. To me, that’s foolish in a technical forum.

michel
Reply to  Tom Johnson
January 15, 2023 10:45 am

No, its not semantics.

The author is saying that it is wrong to say Britain emits 2% of global annual emissions every year, because in every year Britain emits 0.000012% of the total amount of CO2 already in the atmosphere.

This is at best a logical error, it doesn’t follow. Its also a nonsense. No-one cares how UK (or any country’s) annual emissions relate to the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. What they care about, what the speaker was talking about, is what proportion they are of global annual emissions.

You can see this because by the same measure, China, emitting about one third of the global total, or 11+ billion tons a year, by the author’s measure would be emitting only 0.3% of the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. A totally meaningless number, as is the UK number he uses.

So what? Is he going to say that this shows China is not emitting one third of total global emissions? Of course it is, and of course the UK is emitting a bit under 2%.

The speaker’s point was that the big emitters are in the Far East and Latin America, they are emitting hugely more than the UK, and they have good reasons driving them to do that. And that if the UK’s 2% vanished, it would make no difference.

The speaker says, assume there is a climate crisis. The implication for the UK, given its low contribution to the emissions total, is not to install wind turbines or cut back on its emissions, but that it should do R&D to develop clean cheap energy.

You do not make this point clearer, in fact you obscure it, by saying the UK is emitting only 0.000012% of some meaningless quantity which has nothing to do with anything.

What counts is that the UK is only emitting about 2% of the amount the world is emitting. Just accept that this is the right metric to use.

old cocky
Reply to  michel
January 15, 2023 1:17 pm

The author is saying that it is wrong to say Britain emits 2% of global annual emissions every year, because in every year Britain emits 0.000012% of the total amount of CO2 already in the atmosphere.

Being properly pedantic, Britain produces around 2% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

It doesnot add up
Reply to  michel
January 15, 2023 1:34 pm

Well, it is wrong. UK Total CO2 emissions in 2021 were 341.5m tonnes, under 1% of the global total. They were of course even lower in 2020.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/provisional-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics-2021

michel
Reply to  It doesnot add up
January 16, 2023 1:36 am

I had thought it was about 450 million tons, and people sometimes add in the CO2 emitted by manufacturing goods which the UK imports. So its even lower than I had thought.

But any case its obvious that lowering the UK’s emissions is going to make no impact whatever on global emissions.

Its so bizarre and infuriating to be told that the UK is doing yet another futile and expensive measure ‘because climate’ when they can have no effect on it.

DonM
Reply to  michel
January 16, 2023 10:04 am

“You do not make this point clearer, in fact you obscure it, by saying the UK is emitting only 0.000012% of some meaningless quantity which has nothing to do with anything.”

It is not a meaningless quantity; using a percentage of the total better reflects the real impact.

“Its so bizarre and infuriating to be told that the UK is doing yet another futile and expensive measure ‘because climate’ when they can have no effect on it.”

You are correct here. But you fail to understand(?) that the percentage of total emissions is also a meaningless quantity which, with respect to the big picture (that you describe in the above paragraph), is a meaningless stand alone quantity.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tom Johnson
January 16, 2023 12:20 am

Your extremely low percentage is misleading misinformation. The fool is YOU.

Gunga Din
Reply to  John V. Wright
January 15, 2023 1:40 pm

His point about the dwindling numbers of polar bears,”

He did mention that others spoke before him and made many of his points.
I suspect that he was being sarcastic.

Richard Greene
Reply to  John V. Wright
January 16, 2023 12:18 am

“Britain does not contribute 2% of global CO2. The figure is 0.000012%. The BBC makes sure that British people never read or hear about this figure.”

I’ve read claims in the 1% to 3% range for UK as a percentage of global CO2 emissions. … In my opinion, your percentage is complete nonsense.

michel
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 16, 2023 6:12 am

Yes. ‘It doesnot add up’ points out that the UK emitted 346.77 million tons in 2021 (out of a global total of about 37 billion). So its actually a bit under 1%. I was surprised to see how fast it has fallen in recent years. There is a chart here:

https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-kingdom

Sometimes when people discuss this they propose to add in the emissions that imported goods gave rise to. Curiously enough, they never propose deducting the emissions that exported goods gave rise to!

Well, there you go.

Philip Mulholland
January 15, 2023 12:39 am

How Dare You Mr Kisin.

Richard Greene
Reply to  Philip Mulholland
January 16, 2023 12:26 am

Comedian Kisen missed the two MOST important facts about global warming that applies to the UK.

A slightly warmer climate — mainly TMIN in the colder months of the year, is VERY GOOD NEWS for the UK. And also good news for many other nations at similar and higher latitudes.

And more CO2 in the air is VERY GOOD NEWS for C3 photosynthesis plants everywhere — about 90% of 300,000 plant species are C3.

How can anyone from the UK talk about climate change without mentioning the 100% good news for the UK? The only possible excuse is the person is ignorant about climate change in the UK.

strativarius
January 15, 2023 12:46 am

Wokeism sends me to sleep…

abolition man
Reply to  strativarius
January 15, 2023 6:39 am

That’s part of it’s purpose! The wokesters want you to peacefully slumber while they are looting your home of everything valuable!

Harry Passfield
Reply to  strativarius
January 15, 2023 7:13 am

And then…you woke up – or not. If only the woke wouldn’t.

MCourtney
January 15, 2023 1:12 am

Any policy that starts, “Step 1: Win a war with China” is not well thought out.

Green policies are clearly unworkable.

Any party that promotes such policies cannot think Green issues are actually important.
If they did worry about Climate Change, they would not promote these policies.

MarkW
Reply to  MCourtney
January 15, 2023 4:06 pm

I don’t see anyone promoting a war with China.

hildekl
January 15, 2023 3:44 am

For anyone unfamiliar, KK cohosts a very good YT channel named Triggernometry. He and FF interview mostly people that the mainstream won’t … though Ridley, Farage and Peterson have all been on … and if you didn’t already know, during their interviews you’d probably never guess they’re comedians.

Do be warned that their live shows, “Raw”, have a very different tone, not for the woke or easily triggered.

https://www.youtube.com/@Triggerpod

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl_nWwx2B7w

— First post with new sign in requirement …. Kevin Hilde

Last edited 21 days ago by hildekl
joe x
January 15, 2023 6:02 am

excellent video. also, the first us congressman or senator that makes that same speech while in session, wins the day.

note: i have yet to encounter a woke that can think rationally.

sskinner
January 15, 2023 6:06 am

Related – Jacob Bronowski gave a warning several decades ago about the loss of confidence in the West with itself:

Last edited 21 days ago by sskinner
mkelly
Reply to  sskinner
January 15, 2023 10:21 am

His PBS documentary “The Ascent of Man” was wonderful. The accompanying book was a great read also.

Energywise
January 15, 2023 3:18 pm

Wokeism, in all its shapes, dimensions and colours, is just a fad and like the other fads, punk rock, skinheads, mods, hostess trolleys, soda streams, mullets, corsets, net curtains, train sets, road maps, green shield stamps, Avon calling, football pools, spot the ball, sheepskin coats, fry’s five centres and airfix models etc etc, it will fizzle out

Richard Greene
January 16, 2023 12:04 am

This guy is an amusing speaker, but his arguments are pitiful and lack logic:

Starting with the assumption that there is a climate emergency is stupid beyond belief if your goal is to refute claims of a coming climate emergency, which have been wrong since the 1979 Charney Report.

The argument that poor people are not interested in climate change is incomplete. Reality is that at least 7 billion people live in nations that could not care less about Nut Zero. Not just the poor people in those nations.

The argument that Great Britain doesn’t matter because its CO2 emissions are a small percentage of the world’s CO2 emissions lacks logic. ( I’ve seen claims ranging from 1% to 3%, so am suspicious of the 2% claim in the speech ) Most of the 195 nations in the world could make the same claim. The claim is irrelevant when deciding if reducing CO2 emissions are the right thing to do. Similar flawed logic could be used to justify shoplifting a $20 item — Tell the judge after you are caught: “$20 is just a tiny percentage of the retail theft at the store in a full year, so it doesn’t matter/”. . Same flawed logic.

Summar: An amusing speaker with an incompetent message.

Last edited 20 days ago by Richard Greene
DonM
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 16, 2023 10:11 am

Theft directly harms the store, and indirectly harms society.

CO2 emissions directly harms no one, and (likely) indirectly helps society.

Your analogy is lacking.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights