Survival of The Selfish

The latest Newsnight discussion has maintained my frustration with certain messengers and their messages.

But also inspired a philosophical notion or two evolving Darwin. As you do.

'I am in the persuasion business' (Miliband. E)

Now, how is that going so far? Looking at the Indy, Gruaniad and even here... not so great, really, I'd hazard. And why?

'...won't realise the scale of the danger until it is too late'

...is already suffering slightly as I am still trying to purge the image of Miliband's D. and E. in an office in some Nordic capital, with a papier mache model of downtown Gothenburg they made in tech class last week, pushing around wooden models of crocodiles (plastic ones from China via Toys 'R Us obviously a big no-no) as various Eurocrats run around squealing 'the horror, the horror!' and, hopefully, forgetting to mention ze 3rd runway, which is... er... 'different'.

And then onward and, er, still airborne, we have Mr. Kennedy of yet another committee I doubt comes cheap, getting us off the notion of 3 long hauls a year. Not so sure many of us this side of the screen have much of a problem with that already (esp. on Ms. Armstrong's quoted stats), but O.....K. Nice to have a quangocrat's package to be well placed to empathise with the public.

But, but... lest we bash a luxury, let's head over to what by any measure might be deemed a necessity. Phew... we can have green energy (that will meet all the targets, apparently), but 'we' will have to pay. Ignoring what lies behind that little gem to a few sections of society paying tax but not funded by them so much as some, I would have been keen to pursue further the enviROI of that statement. Can we be assured that, if enough wonga gets thrown around, the planet will also benefit too? I am a little unclear, as we head to 70M and counting, TV owning (and licence fee paying -yay!) viewers, where the energy from this and other stuff might be coming from, greenly.

Like biofuelled 747s, might there not be... consequences elsewhere?

And while it was interesting that the Eddy and Fanny love in did get to some 'you're rights!' from one side at least, I remain less than clear, and hence convinced on how just saying something makes it, Picard-like, 'so'. That darn persuasion thing again.

I think the time is right for another poll to show how 'we' are all on board... that is, the pledge bit at least, if not not stopping boarding the planes, as such, unless it is for highly necessary stuff that really should not be brought up, like earning livings, etc (sadly, while Ms. A has produced a noble piece of thought provocation I am sure, and all credit for that, the in-person advocacy was not perhaps as convincing as it might have been in complement. I rather fear Mr. Nixon looked like the soul of televisual conviction and audience empathy in companion, especially when confronted by a questioner not perhaps as 'on message' as others).

But at least she manged to provoke a truly statespersonlike response from one of our 'leaders' with the gibe on his likely tenure. Haven't seen or heard its like since since 3G, when I managed to drop Harbottle right in it for one of my dark deeds... 'But, but...Sir... it's not faaaaaair...'. Easy to see why the opposition benches quake when such power of wit, speed and oratory is unleashed. And makes me proud to think how the UK is going to be represented in he forthcoming negotiations*. I can imagine the likes of the Chinese reps, whose model of governance I remain unsure if Ms. Armstrong was or was not advocating... in this instance at least... really going for the bared throat approach, concession wise.

And as for the sound-biter bit exchanges. 'Impossiblists' vs. defeatists trumped by the shining knight of... 'we're doomed in months, but.. er... optimism' (sorry, the attempted claim of realism is a shipping industry -sized 'that's another issue' long since sailed).

Oh dear. As we're on a water-borne metaphorical streak, this I have just witnessed is what is going to effect a sea change to the careering tanker that is short termism-informed local politics globally and recession-driven public fears, and hence opinion????

* The last exchange was so telling. Because from what I heard it seems the getting of a deal IS THE TARGET, to pols and media alike. Without, it appears, no great concerns as to what that deal might be actually doing, planet wise. Again.

I wish I could have watched iPlayer longer, but the further irony of (ex, twice) Ethical Man at Heathrow Airport in light of the above was satire too far.

I am off now to ponder the notion of the Survival of the Selfish, and how Darwinian theory can be related to the human. We are already a long way from the motivations and actions of a Serengeti Lion pride, and in many cases can be proudly so, but not perhaps so far we should forget that a faltering competitor is still accorded about as much slack as tonight's dinner.

So I'll keep on doing all I can to improve efficiencies and reducing unnecessary wastes, but for the sake of future generations I might also be paying heed to survival strategies as well, just in case man proves either nothing to do with future impositions nature might visit upon us, or our mitigating efforts are not up to the task if we are. Especially bearing in mind the deeds vs. words of those who already see themselves in other, 'better' arks to the majority, by virtue of being somehow 'unique' in mysterious, though a tad 'more equal' ways.

Call it Plan 'A' open brackets(contingency)close brackets. I like to keep my options open, especially when the hens currently sitting all above our one basket seem pretty headless, mobile and putting on a lot of excess weight daily.

Via a post - 87 days to Copenhagen - With 87 days to go until the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, the UK, Danish, French, Finnish and Swedish Foreign Ministers have agreed a joint letter to newspaper editors. - Again with the nifty picture, guys! I honestly tried to reads the letter, but if these guys are in the persuasion/motivation business... sheesh.