@SnowyCA
While we're urging things..
I urge it to not close up shop at the end if things have not resolved. Staying is expensive, and I'll come back to that, but it also says "it matters to resolve this". You can't just walk away from things that matter.
By contrast, postponing to another year's meeting sends a very strong signal (possibly the ONLY signal anyone up the management chain hears) that this is a routine, linear, manageable problem, not an emergency, exponential, must-fix one. So phone in to your office and say you're there until you have resolution.
If you really MUST break, break for less than a year. Maybe you literally don't have funding to stay. Well, get agreement among participants that the next meeting is sooner than a year. Management can't argue against that because that's a group consensus.
Even if you get in trouble for being part of that consensus, (1) you were only a very small part and (2) fixing Climate is going to involve some risks. As risks go, that's a pretty modest one to take. Do your part. Push the line. The world is counting on you.
Probably these things are on budgeted funding cycles, so fighting the notion that this can be scheduled, by pushing the next meeting into the same cycle might get some visibility about the fact that the problem is getting worse.
I'll make a loose analogy, because that's my style and how I think. At a restaurant, if things go wrong in a small way, a manager might give you a free appetizer or dessert. This might feel satisfying, but is probably budgeted. If the problem is bad enough, ask for your whole meal comped. It's a proper response, but it has an important difference. Probably someone will have to answer for it. A higher manager will say "hey, that's unusual. What's that about?" The free appetizer or free dessert isn't just budgeted, but it also doesn't get visibility up the chain so nothing gets fixed. The system knows it is flawed, so it keeps on being flawed and solves the problem by budgets, not by action.
The Climate problem is TOO BUDGETED. But it is a real, not-going-away problem that is worth spending every resource on earth to fix, because every resource on earth is in dire peril just now. Do not behave like this is something that has to fit in a neat box. It does not. The people saying it does are content to see mass death or even extinction. Do not let them have the final word.
People right now seem to meet because it's that time of year. Like it's almost a vacation. Something fun to look forward to all year. To me, that sends the signal that there is no problem. Not in words, but in deeds. Is that the signal you want to send?
One way to make there be a real visibility is to change something that forces the whole management structure (countries, probably, but maybe some big corporations) to have to see it differently.
It also gives the media something to write about rather than just phoning in the previous year's articles with the dates changed.
As I said, just an idea. Well, two of them really. Stay longer, meet more often. But if it's an emergency (and it is), it warrants emergency action, not just routine action.
And it's a problem that's accelerating, but the meeting frequency is not. Is the danger of that dissonance not apparent to everyone? Why not?
#Climate #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #collapse #extinction #conference #COP #COP30 #meetings #media #journalism #ClimateNews #psychology #acceleration #nonlinear #politics #ClimateAction #ClimateInaction