Read on Twitter
"Incremental change is not enough", says Lucas.
Nothing is ever enough for greens.
It's amazing also that people who claim that we must "rethink our economy" really don't know much about, nor even care for economics. https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1276050084715810818
Nothing is ever enough for greens.
It's amazing also that people who claim that we must "rethink our economy" really don't know much about, nor even care for economics. https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1276050084715810818
Have you ever noticed how, despite demanding such *radical* changes, for which 'incremental change' only denotes insufficient progress, there is no explanation from greens as to what the final destination is...
What does the green world look like, when you get up in the morning?
What does the green world look like, when you get up in the morning?
Why can't they spell it out?
What is Caroline Lucas actually demanding?
What is Caroline Lucas actually demanding?
She says, "we need to completely rethink our economy"...
Ok. Explain it, Caroline. Explain what that means. Do I still get paid? Can we afford to buy a house? Or who owns it? How? Do I go to work? How much do I get paid? What can I buy? May I save? How?
What do you *mean*?
Ok. Explain it, Caroline. Explain what that means. Do I still get paid? Can we afford to buy a house? Or who owns it? How? Do I go to work? How much do I get paid? What can I buy? May I save? How?
What do you *mean*?
It is one thing to demand radical "systemic", "structural" change. That's all the rage at the moment. Everyone's doing it.
The problem is that none of the radical demands explain *from* what *to* what?
So how do we know if it's better or worse?
The problem is that none of the radical demands explain *from* what *to* what?
So how do we know if it's better or worse?
Notice, also, that if you resist these imperatives, to point out that vacuous bullshit and easy off-the-shelf platitudes, it is *you* that will be called "ideological" for your objection. I.e. you must be "far right" or a "denier" for wanting to know what they mean.
*Anyone* can have a grievance with the world, and decide that it is a 'system' or a 'structure' that is at fault.
They may even be right.
But unless they can articulate that grievance, explain the problem with the system, and the benefits of another way, it's just a grumble.
They may even be right.
But unless they can articulate that grievance, explain the problem with the system, and the benefits of another way, it's just a grumble.
Are greens just people who think there's something wrong with the world, don't quite know what it is, but know that it's probably got something to do with nature and being nice to trees?
From where I sit, greens seem to be amongst the most privileged in society.
From where I sit, greens seem to be amongst the most privileged in society.
Even if everyone agreed that there's something wrong with the 'system' it does not follow that there is any level of agreement about what the system ought to be.
Greens collect grumbles, mostly from people who actually have it pretty good, and think a bit too much of themselves.
Greens collect grumbles, mostly from people who actually have it pretty good, and think a bit too much of themselves.
