I can't be sure I'm hitting the right tone. I'm trying!

What's really behind this is that I'm trying to use an effective strategy. I feel anger towards those who are in charge, making these terrible stupid and cruel decisions.

But what seems to work is a different approach. First of all, historically nonviolent noncooperation is TWICE as effective a violent resistance. Naturally, those in power have more and better weapons.

But also, violence and anger alienates huge numbers of people and prevents movements from growing large enough to achieve the objectives. Even damaging property (which I have NO moral problem with) alienates people and limits movements.

What I'm trying to do here is provide an attractive alternative—one that literally billions of people can get behind.

It's a bit frustrating because I know that anger works faster. Look how quickly Occupy grew over anger at the ruling class, anger at greed and concentrated wealth? But what did Occupy accomplish?

We do not expect to win over the elites (okay, maybe we can get a handful of them.) We want to expose their stupidity, shatter their narrative, and offer an alternative that makes sense and can be acheived.

And, yes, a key tactic to ending fossil fuels is noncooperation—people in the fossil fuel industry slowing down work, "making mistakes", and ultimately simply not showing up. I feel confident that starting with even a few percent "labor shortage" in that industry would be noticed and felt. And it could be come wide spread and unstoppable—properly promoted.

What looks like weakness is, I think, actually strength here. Reasonable people can disagree.

I started The Saners because no existing movement was having the necessary success. I admire those movements and the people behind them. They are doing things, trying very hard, at great personal risk and sacrifice.

But people now think that climate activists are kooks who throw soup at paintings and block highways.

Attacking particular systems is both ineffective and incorrect. Nearly all elites everywhere have brutalized the environment and crippled the climate. Yes, capitalism by virtue of its "success" is the worse of all. But I don't see the Russians or Chinese or North Koreans helping the situation.

And why let a climate movements—which seeks to help the entire Earth—be diverted in battles between specific ideologies and systems? I say, let's dispense with ALL of them and focus on fixing the problem.

Now, maybe an existing movement is on the right track and will have a breakthrough soon. It would not surprise me. I'd be very, VERY happy. But I can't wait for that. I can't feel confident that's going to happen.

I found the need to do something, and try to find the most effective thing to do.

For me, that's The Saners. But, damn, I'm a bit annoyed at myself if I'm garbling may own message...

In short, I genuinely admire your passion and would not be surprised if you are right. I'm trying to do the right thing, based on my (secondary)research into what seems to work for movements. I sure hope SOMEONE gets results—it doesn't need to be me.