Are you on the wind up again Chris? Honest question as I know you've caught me out before. One thing it clearly isn't is a statement of fact, it might be an opinion, or it might be a deliberately controversial soundbite, but it's not a fact.
The Green party doesn't believe you should stop going on holiday, but it does believe you should fly less. They definitely believe, as you have noted, that you should cut down on unnecessary and environmentally destructive consumption. So do I.
Is it a message that goes down very well by those that benefit from a GDP-driven economy and the inequality that masks? No, absolutely not. That's why it's so important.
Sorry Patrick, I keep trying to give this a proper response and it turns in to some boring stream of conciousness 3 page manifesto. I've written, re written and binned a load of tosh about this forum loving to mention cognitive dissonance. Can anything be more dissonant than our knowledge of where the world is heading coupled with our desire for this year's holiday to Florida?
Writing briefly and quickly is clumsy. She is right, knowingly acting in a way that contributes to global climate change injures people. Not today in a directly linked way. But with no less harm, eventually.
If we found out that the operators of Hinckley power station knew it was causing problems that would kill people in 75 years time but carried on anyway, would they be guilty? Of course they would. So why not conspicuous resource burning consumption?
A polite reduction in consumption is meaningless. What level of consumption by 'us' would be acceptable and manageable if copied by everyone in China, Malaysia, South Korea, Brazil, India, Pakistan......
What would be a sensible number of holiday flights per person, for 7 billion people?