Jensen called for “organized political resistance.” While I can’t complain about that idea, I think it carries more weight to say we need *strategic* organized political resistance. I know I’m not wowing anyone with this not-so-novel idea, but bear with me.

It’s time this “movement” put some (more) brain power behind finding a middle ground between the lifestyle changes (taking less showers, buying green products, and yes, even protesting) and the overwhelming idea of climate change/corporate control.

Why is the lifestyle approach so popular, even to the point where corporations are getting in on the action? Because it’s easy. When I say it’s easy, I’m not discounting the act of living lighter or consciously. By easy, I mean that people get it; those are very tangible things everyone can do.

So where is the bridge?

Let’s look at the UN Conference in Copenhagen this December, for example. This has been built up to be a milestone event for the climate justice movement. It is also the epitome of a wooly and distant issue– outside of public everyday life concern. I agree with Adrian that challenging corporate practices is essential, but I also think it’s useful to bring corporate accountability into everyday life, perhaps even with a local face… “meet your neighboring Chevron lobbyist, who will also be traveling to Denmark this winter”

Whether I conveyed this or not, I thought it was worth noting that there are some serious gaps in organizing/acting for the “movement,” however defined. If we are working to challenge the systemic mechanisms that got us here and continue to keep us in a disabled state, we better start generating some relevant theory about what we are doing and how best to do it.

Sustainable green solutions like these are more attractive to our embattled business executives that might struggle to keep things up. Combining the noted industry, business executives, and green solutions will surely save the planet.