The text critiques the modern concept of 'progress,' arguing that it is an unexamined process that demoralizes efforts to seek meaningful change. It calls for a reassessment of progress based on independent criteria that promote human flourishing and culture. The author advocates for a new political and philosophical ideology that transcends the limitations of liberalism, leftism, and conservatism, drawing on Wittgenstein's aphorism to support this perspective.

A protest march towards the Houses of Parliament, starting from Tate Britain, involved participants carrying freshly coppiced branches. The demonstration, reminiscent of a scene from Macbeth, highlighted climate change activism.

Rupert Read's book emphasizes the importance of climate honesty, arguing that facing the truth about climate change can lead to authentic living and collective mobilization. He critiques the '1.5 delusion' and calls for radical truth-telling to address injustices faced by the global South and future generations. The book is endorsed by various authors and public figures, encouraging readers to confront climate realities.

The Green Party is advocating for real hope and change with four Green MPs in Parliament, emphasizing their role in holding the new government accountable. The message encourages people to join the party during what is described as the most exciting time in its history.

The Green Party is urging support for their General Election fund to elect more Green MPs by the 4th of July. They emphasize the need for more Green voices in parliament to build on Caroline Lucas's legacy and hold the next government accountable, offering voters hope and change.

The article presents three speculative scenarios for the future of East Anglia in 2034, each depicting different outcomes based on the world's response to climate change. The first scenario describes a phoenix-like recovery from climate disasters, the second a dystopian future with far-right governments and climate action sabotage, and the third a transformative shift towards a sustainable and resilient society. The article also promotes a series of playlets by Steve Waters, funded by the Arts Council, and a book titled 'This civilisation is finished', both of which explore these futures.

The film 'The End We Start From' portrays a near-future London submerged by unprecedented floods, highlighting the realistic and poetic depiction of climate disaster. Unlike previous films, it focuses on the visceral experience of climate collapse, emphasizing the importance of community and resilience. The narrative follows a mother and her baby navigating through the chaos, ultimately choosing to rebuild in a devastated London rather than retreating to a secluded commune. The film underscores the urgency of addressing climate change and the need for collective action, resonating with the current global climate crisis.

The film 'The end we start from' is a poetic drama set in a near-future London submerged by floods, following a drought. It realistically portrays potential future climate impacts and emphasizes human resilience and community in the face of disaster. The protagonist, played by Jodie Comer, chooses to rebuild in London rather than escape to an idyllic commune, embodying the film's message of reconnection and responsibility. The film is seen as a 'thrutopia', offering a vision of moving through climate horrors with humanity intact. Rupert Read, the author and Co-Director of The Climate Majority Project, relates the film's themes to his own book on parental love and climate responsibility, and underscores the urgency of climate action in light of the ongoing extreme 'El Nino' event.

Rupert Read emphasizes the need for business leaders to lobby for science-based policies and regulations to effectively address climate change. He criticizes the UK government for backtracking on net zero commitments and highlights the limitations of businesses trying to act ethically within market constraints. Read calls for businesses to engage at a systemic level and push governments for more stringent regulation to ensure business and finance are climate and nature compatible.

Helena Farstad and Rupert Read discuss the significant climate changes in 2023 and the powerlessness of businesses to address the climate crisis without government intervention. They argue that businesses must lobby for strong climate policies and regulations, such as a progressive carbon tax, to create a level playing field and enable ethical actors to succeed. The authors announce the Climate Majority Project's upcoming campaign 'Regulate Us' to push for better business regulation and a sane climate-policy environment. They invoke Vaclav Havel's 'power of the powerless' to emphasize the need for businesses to admit their limitations and demand government leadership in climate action.

The article criticizes the outcomes of CoP28, arguing that the event has failed to produce meaningful progress on climate action. It highlights the inadequacy of the agreement, which only calls for transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, leaving out significant sectors like transportation and heavy industry. The author advocates for the end of the CoP system, suggesting that smaller, more agile coalitions and business-led initiatives could be more effective. The Climate Majority Project's 'Regulate Us' campaign is presented as a promising alternative, emphasizing the need for businesses to push governments towards stronger regulatory frameworks to address the climate crisis.

Faith in UN climate conferences is at a new low, exacerbated by revelations of the UAE's plans to use COP28 for new oil deals. Despite this, the article argues that this moment presents an opportunity for progress by acknowledging the failure of current institutions and the need for democratic action to drive real climate solutions. The piece criticizes the formulaic nature of COP conferences and calls for a shift towards building democratic mandates for systemic change, emphasizing the importance of government regulations to enable sustainable business practices.

The article explores the philosophical work of Joanna Macy, arguing that ecological grief is a fitting response to our ecological predicament and that much of the current mental ill health is a sane response to ecological reality. It claims that all ecological emotions are grounded in love and compassion, and acceptance of these emotions reveals a non-dualistic acceptance of the world. The paper focuses on the revolutionary qualities of ecological grief and its potential to drive mass climate action, integrating Buddhist and Western philosophical themes, particularly Kierkegaardian ideas, to propose a pragmatic and eco-spiritual path.

Gail Bradbrook, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion (XR), was found guilty of criminal damage for a 2019 protest. The article reflects on XR's evolution from radical actions to a more inclusive and lawful approach, emphasizing the need for positive, effective climate action. XR's past radicalism paved the way for new organizations like Insulate Britain and Just Stop Oil. The future of XR involves uniting people in lawful, community-based actions to address climate change. Despite its achievements, XR faces challenges in regaining public trust and achieving its ambitious climate goals.

Celine Lim, an Indigenous Kayan leader from Sarawak, discusses the critical role of Indigenous communities in addressing the climate crisis. She emphasizes the disconnection between modern industrialized society and the Earth, advocating for the inclusion of Indigenous perspectives in environmental management. Lim shares her personal grief over the loss of connection to her roots and her activism against the exploitation of Malaysian forests, highlighting the broader implications for the planet.

The article explores the concept of 'disabstraction,' a term coined to describe the process of re-embedding abstract ideas into concrete historical and philosophical contexts. It critiques modernity and the myth of liberty, suggesting that true freedom involves a deeper understanding of history and community. The text references various thinkers like Jacques Derrida, Ivan Illich, and Karl Polanyi, and touches on contemporary issues such as right-wing media narratives and the idea of a Distributist Congress. The overall tone is reflective and critical, questioning the current state of societal and cultural understanding.

Five years after the launch of Extinction Rebellion (XR), Rupert Read reflects on the movement's impact and the worsening climate crisis. He argues that XR's alarmist stance has been vindicated by recent climate events and criticizes mainstream climate science for understating the severity of the situation. Read calls for a broader, more inclusive climate movement and highlights the importance of new organizations like Wild Card and Switch It Green. He emphasizes the need for collective action to address the escalating ecological threat and urges the climate majority to become more active and vocal.

Despite being denied by a joint review panel and two courts of appeal, the Grassy Mountain coal mining project by Australian company Benga Mining, now renamed Northback Holdings by billionaire Gina Rinehart, is still considered an 'advanced coal project' by Alberta regulators. This classification exempts it from a ministerial order that banned coal mining in the eastern slopes of the Rockies. The Alberta Energy Regulator's stance, which allows the project to potentially proceed, has been met with widespread opposition from Albertans and criticized as preposterous and illegal by experts. The situation has reignited protests and concerns over the environmental impact and mistrust in the government's coal policies.

The article argues that the current Cop climate summits have failed to address the climate emergency effectively and calls for an alternative approach with enforcement mechanisms. It suggests forming a 'climate progressive' bloc of nations, including the G77, to take decisive action. The author criticizes the lack of progress at Cop26 and emphasizes the urgency of adapting to the worsening climate crisis. The piece highlights the need for a new framework that can genuinely address global climate challenges.

Rupert Read, a former academic, shares his personal experience with a severe thunderstorm in France, emphasizing the increasing frequency and severity of climate disasters worldwide. He highlights the recent flash flooding in New York City and the catastrophic floods in Libya as examples of how no place is immune to climate change. Read has left his academic position to focus on the Climate Majority Project, aiming to build resilience against such disasters. He stresses the importance of collective action and preparedness in the face of the 'new abnormal' brought about by climate change.

The article critiques the notion of a 'new Cold War' between the United States and China, arguing that the real conflict is a 'hot war' against the planet due to climate change. It highlights the escalating military tensions over Taiwan and Asia, while emphasizing the environmental destruction caused by both nations' greenhouse gas emissions. The author criticizes U.S. politicians, particularly Republicans and figures like Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, for denying climate change and promoting fossil fuels. The piece calls for the U.S. and China to demilitarize their relations and collaborate on combating the climate crisis for future generations.

Professor Rupert Read, Co-Director of the Climate Majority Project, emphasizes the critical role of the insurance industry in addressing the climate crisis. He argues that insurers, as gatekeepers to many industries, can influence climate policy and practices by penalizing harmful activities and advocating for regulatory changes. The interview highlights the existential threat climate change poses to the insurance sector, urging insurers to disclose climate risks, act against destructive practices, and invest in sustainable futures. The discussion also critiques the Net Zero Insurance Alliance for its inadequate goals and calls for more robust, collaborative efforts within the industry.

Charles and David Koch, known for their control of Koch Industries and significant wealth, have used their resources to support libertarian and conservative causes, including climate denial, through foundations and lobby groups like Americans for Prosperity. The article speculates on the potential positive impact if the Koch Brothers had instead focused their influence and wealth on environmental causes.

Fossil fuels dominate global energy production, with nuclear energy receiving disproportionately high funding and subsidies over the past 75 years. The UK and US have invested heavily in nuclear power, with significant financial commitments and potential taxpayer burdens. The article explores a hypothetical scenario where renewable energy received the same level of financial support, suggesting that this could have significantly altered public consciousness and the fight against climate change.

The article emphasizes the urgent need for proactive climate action, arguing that traditional activism is insufficient. It highlights the increasing severity of climate impacts, such as extreme heatwaves and wildfires, and calls for community-based initiatives and professional networks to drive transformative change. The piece advocates for a shift from mere activism to practical, on-the-ground efforts to combat climate change and build resilience.

Speculates on the potential impact of Bobby Kennedy's presidency on environmental policies and the Vietnam War, suggesting that his leadership could have significantly advanced ecological awareness and possibly prevented the war's escalation. Highlights Kennedy's forward-thinking stance on ecology, pollution, and quality of life, envisioning a world where his presidency could have led to substantial long-term benefits.

SARS-1, which primarily affected the Far East in 2002-3, served as a warning that was largely ignored by the West. The article explores a counter-factual history where SARS had a significant impact on Western countries, leading to better preparedness and potentially saving millions of lives during the Covid-19 pandemic. It highlights the effective responses of East Asian countries like Taiwan and South Korea, attributing their success to cultural attitudes and early experiences with SARS. The piece argues that a more precautionary and coordinated global response could have mitigated the impact of Covid-19, preventing the development of more dangerous variants like Delta.

The article envisions three potential futures for East Anglia by 2034, shaped by climate change and societal responses. The first scenario depicts a region devastated by climate disasters, the second a dystopian outcome exacerbated by far-right policies and fossil fuel interests, and the third a hopeful transformation towards sustainable living. The narrative emphasizes the urgency of immediate action and adaptation to avoid catastrophic outcomes, supported by a series of playlets by Steve Waters, funded by the Arts Council, to raise awareness and inspire change.

The article argues that the upcoming UK general election will not address the urgent issue of climate breakdown. It criticizes both the Conservative and Labour parties for their inadequate responses to environmental and social crises, and suggests that a broader, more inclusive political movement is necessary to tackle these existential threats. The authors call for a new political culture that prioritizes climate action and social cohesion, warning that without significant change, the UK and the world face severe environmental and societal collapse.

The article critiques the 'Build Back Better' slogan, originally focused on disaster recovery, for being co-opted by economic growth agendas in the US and UK, neglecting climate resilience. It argues that the COVID-19 pandemic was a missed opportunity to pivot towards sustainable practices. The author presents three options for addressing the climate crisis: continuing as usual, falling into tribalism, or strategic adaptation. The latter is advocated as the only viable path, requiring a philosophical and collective approach to confront the existential threat of climate change and societal collapse. The text emphasizes the need for a shift in priorities, away from endless economic growth towards preserving what is most valuable in society.

Explores a counterfactual scenario where Soviet Colonel Stanislav Petrov followed protocol and launched a nuclear retaliation in 1983, highlighting the narrow escape from accidental nuclear war due to his bravery and good sense. Emphasizes the potential catastrophic consequences and the importance of individual actions in historical events.

Rupert Read argues that the persistent narrative of having 'just enough time' to address climate change is false, as climate scientists privately expect warming to exceed the 1.5C 'safe' limit. He emphasizes the urgent need for action, noting that the UK and Scotland are not immune to the impacts of climate change, which could include disruptions in food production and changes in climate due to ice-melt in the Arctic affecting the Gulf Stream. Read calls for public backing of extraordinary measures to limit damage and navigate instability, highlighting that many people are already taking climate action into their own hands. He stresses the importance of preparing for climate chaos and chronic uncertainty, and the need for collective action to meet the challenge of our time.

The article argues that the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is no longer achievable, with significant implications for climate policy and action. It criticizes political and business leaders for their inaction and calls for a shift towards realistic adaptation and mitigation strategies. The author emphasizes the need for public awareness and accountability, drawing parallels to historical moments of collective action. The article also highlights the importance of compensating poorer nations disproportionately affected by climate change.

The author is leaving the University of East Anglia after 26 years due to its focus on scientism and managerialism, which they believe is ill-suited to address the climate crisis. They criticize the impact agenda in academia for prioritizing economic gain over scholarly values and argue for a reevaluation of research priorities to include contributions to freedom, clarity of thought, virtue, and beauty. The author advocates for a post-growth/degrowth approach and is joining the Climate Majority Project to work on climate issues outside the academic system.

The fossil fuel industry's long-standing knowledge of its detrimental impact on the climate has led to calls for profound legislative action to end the fossil fuel era. Despite the industry's influence and lobbying efforts to maintain oil dependency, the climate crisis benefits no one, including industry executives. Oil corporations have been accused of delaying public awareness of fossil fuels' role in climate change. The article discusses the Climate Majority Project's goal to shift business orientation away from competitive advantage-seeking. It calls for the fossil fuel industry to acknowledge its responsibility for environmental crises, apologize, and tell the truth in legally binding documents. The industry must invest in renewables, reduce emissions, and lobby for policies that support a transition to a renewable energy future. Citizens are encouraged to demand legislative action, support a windfall tax on oil companies, and reduce energy demand. The article suggests that employees, investors, and shareholders of fossil fuel companies should press for change or divest.

The article questions Labour leader Keir Starmer's commitment to environmental issues, criticizing his alleged disparaging remarks about 'tree-huggers' and highlighting the historical and cultural significance of the term. It contrasts Labour's stance with the Conservative Government's failures on climate funding, suggesting that Labour missed an opportunity to critique the government and demonstrate its own environmental commitment.

The article discusses the urgency of addressing climate change, highlighting the record-breaking temperatures in Europe and the increasing desperation among people. It critiques the effectiveness of radical actions by groups like Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion, suggesting that while they raise awareness, their methods may not be the most effective for widespread climate action. The Climate Majority Project (CMP) is presented as a more inclusive and practical approach, focusing on citizen action and community initiatives to drive governmental and industrial change. CMP aims to support and grow projects that enable individuals to contribute to climate action in their workplaces and communities, emphasizing the collective power to create change.

305 million years ago, the Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse led to the rapid disappearance of vast coal forests due to climatic changes, resulting in a significant ecological shift. This historical event parallels current threats to modern rainforests like the Amazon, driven by human-induced climate change and deforestation. Europe is experiencing similar climatic shocks, with regions like Spain facing desertification. The article emphasizes the urgency of addressing climate change to prevent a phase transition in ecosystems, which could lead to a new ecological baseline, potentially resulting in the 'Holocene Ecosystem Collapse'.

Chris Smaje discusses the impending publication of his book and the potential for a trip to the USA to promote agrarian localism. He introduces a reader poll on the environmental impact of his travel. The article delves into the concept of 'doomer optimism,' critiquing the tendency to dismiss radical rethinking of the status quo. Smaje emphasizes the need to embrace both doom and optimism to address global crises effectively. He critiques high-tech solutions and advocates for a low-tech, distributed localism as a Plan B. The text also touches on the limitations of trade in building solidarity and the historical context of post-war global trade systems.

Students at various universities, including the University of Washington and UC San Diego, are intensifying efforts to remove fossil fuel companies from campuses through divestment, decarbonization, and dissociation. These actions are part of a broader climate activism movement that has gained momentum post-pandemic, with significant victories such as Harvard's divestment from fossil fuels. The movement aims to undermine the social legitimacy of fossil fuel companies and push for clean energy transitions, reflecting a comprehensive approach to combating climate change in higher education.

The Climate Majority Project, co-directed by Rupert Read, aims to empower citizens to take meaningful climate action, addressing the lack of bottom-up pressure on governments to implement adequate climate policies. The initiative seeks to build on the momentum created by Extinction Rebellion (XR) UK and other climate activists, fostering community support and pragmatic realism about the current state of climate change. The project emphasizes the importance of collective empowerment and citizen-led efforts to drive systemic change, contrasting with more radical forms of activism.

Governments have consistently failed to deliver adequate climate solutions, necessitating a mass movement of citizen action. Extinction Rebellion (XR) UK has shifted its tactics to prioritize movement-building, successfully attracting large crowds. Former XR activists, including Prof. Rupert Read, are launching the Climate Majority Project to grow citizen-led climate action across the UK. This project aims to empower citizens to take meaningful action and create a societal tipping point for systemic change. The initiative emphasizes the importance of community support and realistic understanding of climate challenges.

Former Extinction Rebellion (XR) UK activists are launching the Climate Majority Project to mobilize widespread citizen action on climate change. The initiative aims to empower communities across the UK to take meaningful climate action, addressing the public as informed citizens rather than consumers. The project reflects a pragmatic realism about the current climate crisis, emphasizing the need for collective empowerment and systemic change. By fostering local climate hubs and professional initiatives, the Climate Majority Project seeks to build a mass movement capable of holding governments accountable and driving significant climate policies.

The author argues that Wittgenstein's philosophy, particularly his concept of co-freedom, is crucial for addressing 21st-century ecological and political challenges. He critiques the modern obsession with material and technological progress, advocating for a politics of community and relationality. The text emphasizes the interconnectedness of freedom and the necessity of a functioning ecosystem, urging a profound critique of individualism and the fetishization of freedom.

Dr. Rupert Read argues that the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C is now unattainable and that acknowledging this failure is crucial for mobilizing effective climate action. The latest IPCC report indicates that climate impacts will be more severe than previously predicted, and Read suggests that accepting the reality of surpassing the 1.5C threshold could lead to a greater collective response, including the kind of truth-telling activism seen from Extinction Rebellion and Greta Thunberg.

Rupert Read reflects on the films Avatar and Avatar 2, discussing their impact on activism and environmental awareness. He highlights the original Avatar's influence on viewers and its reception by various groups, and argues that Avatar 2, despite its flaws, is timely and educational. The sequel's portrayal of the 'tulkun', whale-like creatures, and its themes of non-violence and wisdom are emphasized. Read suggests that the films encourage a reevaluation of humanity's relationship with nature and indigenous wisdom, and calls for a deeper understanding of ecological balance. He criticizes the commercialization of the film's message and urges viewers to carry the film's deeper values into their lives, advocating for a non-violent, balanced approach to facing ecological crises.

The sequel to Avatar, 'The Way of Water', is seen as a culturally significant film that can influence public perception on environmental issues, similar to its predecessor. The film's portrayal of non-violent, wise creatures and its underlying message of respecting and learning from nature is highlighted. The article draws parallels between the film's release and recent environmental summits, suggesting that the film could inspire a shift in how humanity views and interacts with the planet. Despite acknowledging weaknesses in the film, the author emphasizes its strong message and potential to motivate audiences towards environmental restoration.

The article critiques the philosophy of 'longtermism', which it sees as a grave threat to addressing the climate crisis. It argues that 'longtermists' prioritize technological mastery and population growth over ecological and climate stability, and are less concerned with tangible climate risks than speculative threats like AI. The author emphasizes the need for long-term thinking that focuses on being good ancestors and guardians of the future, rather than the 'longtermist' vision of endless economic expansion. The article also contrasts 'longtermism' with the climate action movements like Sunrise movement, Extinction Rebellion, and figures like Greta Thunberg, which it views as embodying true long-term thinking.

Rupert Read's new book, 'Do You Want to Know the Truth? The Surprising Rewards of Climate Honesty,' is published by the Simplicity Institute and explores the importance of facing the truth about the climate and ecological emergency. The book, which follows his previous works, is a collection of essays that challenge the reader to accept uncomfortable truths for revolutionary change. It emphasizes the significance of truth in the context of movements like Extinction Rebellion and the impact of figures like Greta Thunberg.

The article argues that the Conference of the Parties (CoP) system is inherently designed to fail in addressing climate change, citing the lack of enforcement mechanisms and the ineffectiveness of international agreements like the Paris Agreement. It calls for alternative approaches, such as global citizens' assemblies and local community actions, to combat climate change. The author emphasizes the need for admitting institutional failures and preparing for the consequences of exceeding the 1.5°C warming limit. The article also highlights the European Parliament's recent endorsement of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty as a positive step.

Climate breakdown is characterized as a 'White Swan' event, meaning it is predictable and expected based on current evidence, unlike 'Black Swan' events which are rare and unpredictable. The author argues for a precautionary approach to climate change, emphasizing the need for rapid and unprecedented efforts to decarbonize to avoid catastrophic outcomes. The text critiques societal tendencies towards 'soft' climate denialism and advocates for greater climate awareness and political action.

The article debates the effectiveness of disruptive tactics in climate activism, with Rupert Read advocating for a new moderate flank and Indigo Rumbelow supporting more radical actions. Both authors emphasize the urgency of addressing climate change, criticizing governments for their inaction and highlighting the need for collective efforts. The text references historical movements and current climate impacts, urging readers to join the fight against the fossil fuel economy.

Rupert Read, an associate professor and environmental campaigner, writes an open letter to Peter Edwards, a trustee of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), urging him to step down due to the organization's reputation as a science denial group and its acceptance of funds from fossil fuel billionaires. Read emphasizes the urgent need for a transition to renewable energy, citing recent IPCC reports, and highlights the role of trustees as guardians of the future. The letter, published on Writers Rebel, calls for public action against the GWPF.

Rupert Read's article in The Ecological Citizen discusses Vaclav Havel's critique of technophilia and its relevance to the climate and ecological crisis. Havel's work exposes the fallacy of consumer society's reassurance that 'everything is going to be okay' and challenges the illusions held by many environmentalists and the 'progressive' ruling class. The article advocates for the creation of an ecological civilization through transformative adaptation as the only honest way to prevent collapse.

Liz Truss, having become Prime Minister through a Conservative leadership election, is criticized for implementing radical and damaging policies without a general election mandate. The article argues that her government lacks legitimacy and calls for an immediate general election. It highlights the negative impact of her policies on the environment and economy, benefiting a small elite while harming the broader population. The piece advocates for a progressive alliance among opposition parties to defeat the Conservative government in future elections.

The article discusses the urgency of the climate crisis, highlighting recent extreme weather events in the UK, California, and France. It argues that it's no longer sufficient to be climate change activists; instead, people should become 'doists' who actively engage in creating solutions. The author mentions initiatives like Climate Emergency Centres and groups such as Lawyers For Net Zero and Fiduciaries For The Future, which are working towards environmental sustainability. The piece calls for community-level action and transformative adaptation to the deteriorating climate.

The article critiques the World Economic Forum's vision of the future as disconnected from Earth, undemocratic, and designed to preserve elite privileges through technological control. It argues that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are in crisis, with progress stalling or reversing, and that the concept of 'development' is inherently flawed, colonialistic, and locks poor countries into a damaging system. The author suggests that 'development' and 'growth' are not sustainable and that a relocalized world with degrowth is needed. The article also references Jem Bendell's work on 'deep adaptation' to climate change and proposes that the SDGs be replaced with more bottom-up approaches to resilience building, as practiced by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The article critiques the use of the term 'climate emergency' by activists, scientists, and politicians, arguing that the lack of congruent action undermines the urgency the term implies. It discusses the failure of net-zero carbon emissions pledges to prompt immediate action, the potential dangers of relying on unproven negative emissions technologies, and the societal tendency towards disavowal of the climate crisis. The authors call for a radical reassessment of communication and action strategies, emphasizing the need for congruence between declarations of emergency and actual behavior. They suggest that scientists and activists admit the failure of current approaches and engage in transformative adaptation, while also joining public movements to demand real change.

The Precautionary Principle is highlighted as a crucial safety measure in today's uncertain world, emphasizing its importance for the wellbeing of both humanity and the planet. It is often encapsulated by proverbs like 'look before you leap', serving as a protective measure in precarious situations.

The article by Rupert Read emphasizes the importance of spending more time outdoors, not just for leisure but also during school and work hours. It argues that outdoor activities could have significantly reduced COVID-19 infections and deaths. The author shares personal experiences of teaching philosophy outdoors at the University of East Anglia and criticizes the reluctance of others to adopt similar practices. The text also highlights the broader benefits of outdoor activities, such as improved health and well-being, and calls for a shift towards a more nature-connected lifestyle to address both the climate crisis and personal happiness.

Dr. Rupert Read, an expert reviewer for the IPCC, argues that the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C is now unattainable and that clinging to this target lulls society into a false sense of security. He suggests that acknowledging failure to meet this goal could mobilize people to take more significant action against climate change. The latest IPCC report indicates that the impact of climate change will be more severe than predicted, with 2C of warming posing a substantial risk to global food production. Read advocates for a shift in climate communication to reflect the dire reality and to inspire a more profound commitment to addressing the crisis.

The author, a philosopher concerned with climate change, critiques the tech-obsessed interpretation of longtermism, which prioritizes humanity's distant future and technological advancement over immediate ecological concerns. The essay references Phil Torres's critique of longtermism as a dangerous secular credo that justifies extreme measures for species survival. It highlights the irony of longtermists like Nick Bostrom, who propose invasive surveillance to prevent existential threats, while downplaying the urgency of climate breakdown. The author argues for a relocalized future with democratic control over technology, contrasting with the technophile longtermists from wealthy countries who dominate the discourse.

The text is a critical review of Iain McGilchrist's book 'The Matter With Things,' emphasizing its importance in critiquing reductionist materialism and scientism. The author, Rupert Read, discusses McGilchrist's arguments on the hemispheric differences in the brain and their implications for understanding truth and reality. The review also critiques McGilchrist's stance on metaphysics and his approach to language and truth, drawing on various philosophical perspectives, including those of Wittgenstein, Rorty, and others. The text highlights the book's comprehensive nature and its potential to influence contemporary thought.

The article critiques the current interpretation of long-termism, which prioritizes technological innovation and economic growth over addressing climate change. It argues that this approach, supported by figures like Nick Bostrom, Peter Thiel, and Jaan Tallinn, perpetuates the very systems that contribute to ecological crises. The author advocates for a more democratic and localized approach to technology development, emphasizing the need for genuine long-term thinking to address global eco-catastrophe.

The article emphasizes the urgency of addressing climate change and suggests three new year's resolutions to help the planet: workplace activism, acting age-appropriate by joining community efforts, and building resilient local communities. It highlights the failures of Cop26 and the importance of individual and collective action in combating climate change. The author, Professor Rupert Read, encourages readers to engage with various organizations and initiatives to make a positive impact.

The article encourages readers to adopt new year's resolutions that benefit the planet, highlighting the urgency of climate action in light of recent extreme weather events and the IPCC's warning on greenhouse gas emissions. It suggests workplace activism, acting age-appropriately by joining environmental groups, and building resilient local communities as ways to contribute. The author, Professor Rupert Read, is affiliated with the University of East Anglia and Extinction Rebellion.

The article advocates for a more sustainable and eco-friendly Christmas by giving poems as presents instead of material gifts. It critiques the concept of 'progress' as defined by capitalist economics and liberal technocracy, arguing that it leads to environmental degradation and social issues. The author calls for a new narrative that emphasizes precautionary thinking and sustainable living, challenging the dominant ideologies of both the political left and right.

Rupert Read, a philosopher and climate activist, disputes the prosecution's claim that his actions do not address an 'imminent' threat to life, drawing a parallel with Anne Frank's hypothetical situation during Nazi occupation. He argues that the Global Warming Policy Foundation poses a similar imminent threat by delaying climate action. Read appeals to the magistrates on a personal level, sharing his fears for the future world his nephew and nieces will inherit and questioning what else he could have done, given his extensive efforts through academia, political activism, and direct action to combat climate denial.

Rupert Read argues that political leaders are unlikely to deliver meaningful outcomes at COP26, suggesting that a poor outcome might catalyze public action. He criticizes the EU's climate plans and highlights the failure of rich nations to support Majority World countries. The article underscores the urgency of climate action, citing recent environmental disasters and reports predicting failure to meet climate targets. Read concludes that real change will come from citizens, not governments.

The article provides a critical perspective on the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, highlighting the perceived ineffectiveness of the event and the lack of enforcement powers in climate agreements. It criticizes leaders like Boris Johnson for their inconsistent actions and underscores the need for greater public protest to drive meaningful change. The author emphasizes that real climate leadership now falls to the public rather than governments, citing the efforts of activists like Greta Thunberg.

Maria Ressa and Dmitry Muratov won this year's Nobel Peace Prize, but the author argues that Greta Thunberg should have received the award for her significant contributions to climate activism. Thunberg's efforts have inspired a global movement and challenged political leaders to take serious action against climate change. The Nobel Committee missed a crucial opportunity to highlight the importance of climate action. The author, Rupert Read, emphasizes Thunberg's historical impact and calls for greater recognition of climate justice.

The author, a Green party member, expresses frustration with BBC Radio Cambridgeshire for inviting them to debate a climate change denier. They criticize the BBC's notion of 'balance' in giving deniers equal platform, comparing it to debating the health impacts of smoking. The author refused to participate, arguing that the science of climate change is settled and that debates should focus on the adequacy of the Paris climate accord and societal changes needed to address the climate crisis. They mention a ruling against the BBC's promotion of climate change deniers and suggest that a collective refusal to engage with deniers could force the BBC to change its coverage methods. The author intends to file an official complaint to the BBC.