Copenhagen

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

It's opened.

Dunno in other countries, but here the noise about it for weeks now is "it is our last chance!!". And also, "ok, Americans are better, but they still don't do a lot, while they pollute the most by person". Also the tone is rather to pessimism here about a big deal there.

Anyways, no matter all of this, personally I think it could be one more step, would it be just psychologically, to a "global management" which is something good. For example the demand of technology transfer from Southern Countries to Northern Countries, just the fact there is a demand of "sharing" (damn, this word still exist) stuffs, can already been something, no matter the outcome of it.

Anyways, all what you would like to say about this "Meeting for the Planet" (the cause may have more impact if when they speak about ecology they first spoke about the "humanity" or the "life" than about the "planet"), you can put it here.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

btw - "global management" = "massive power grab", regardless of whether it's about the environment or not.

In the present set up, certainly. But it can take other forms, I'm not particularly claiming for a World State. And by the way, even if I think ultimately a Global Governance can be possible, I also seriously wonder whether human can all gather themselves in only one entity, maybe we will always need at least 2, though I think a common background even if light can be possible in the end.

And anyways, outside of these considerations, I think it makes sense to have some global management of resources.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Yeah, pretty easy to hit that. But that remains a political summit before everything. Personally I prefer they waste some here and do the meeting more than they don't. Video-conferences surely are pretty cool but that may better they meet personally, would it be just psychologically, even if no one cares about it I think such summit are important psychologically in term of Global Governance, would it be just for things like resources, what we already do with wales for example. No matter the outcome of the summit.

Then, yeah, they could have done some efforts, sure. Our Greenies went by train there .

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Sarkozy is getting nervous:

Watch the vid: http://www.france24.com/en/20091217-copenhagen-sarkozy-world-leaders-climate-clinton-un-summit?autoplay=1

I think you haven't finished to see him making the nervous guy on big international affairs, he loves it.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

COP 15 was a waste of valuable time.

As I already said, nah. It has been one more preceding of global governance, in a realm in which global governance makes sense more of that.

And well, seems it really shew the weight of China too, that's mainly them who blocked apparently, seems that with the US credits and the African states they have a lot of things in their hands (and I don't speak of the numerous industries that he whole world has put there), and can act a bit in the way they want, at least in that realm. Wondering how this has been reported in US media.

Also, it pointed out the silliness of the process of the decision which requires a consensus in that model of governance, thus maybe pushing to make some change in that realm in the future.

So, it pointed out some flaws, it has been one more preceding, and it more clearly shew the weight of China.

On the realm of environment, yes, sure, the best it did could have been the fact to have been a fail, thus maybe making increasing the pressure about ecology in the future.