Dear viewer, these subtitles were generated by a machine via the service YouTube and therefore are (very) buggy. If you are capable, please help us to create good quality subtitles: https://c3subtitles.de/talk/2657 Thanks!
[Music]
and now let's get to the last talk uh
and the second to last event on this
stage for today um uh the next talk will
be by Rina enri who are co-organizers of
the bits and boa conference and they
will tell us a little bit about what
might be not so cool about the current
uh Tech
fictions thank
[Applause]
you H yes hi and Welcome to our talk on
techn fixes digital Tech fictions as
replacement for social and political
change question mark I'm R I'm a policy
adviser at Friends of the earth Germany
H and I'm very happy to be here with
Rina hello I'm Riner um I'm the co-chair
of the Forum computer scientists for
peace and social responsibility we're
sitting over there um and we work we
both work at the intersection of
sustainability and Technology well
causes and fixes for
unsustainability we notice there is
something wrong about the way how we
talk about tech in a lot of cases
especially in the context of global
warming Global crisises uh human rights
issues and sustainability many times
Tech is overestimated as a solution for
social and environmental change in our
work we identified identified again and
again um discourses in which the concept
of technology is misused in several
ways we now will give
oh yeah that's yeah that's us um now we
will give some um Problem background
definition um then we will give some
examples where we think there there has
been a case of tech no fixes and we will
group them we will discuss them and even
try to find patterns within them uh or
give reasons why we think those are
techn fixes fixes um and uh then we
propose in the end a mental uh tool for
exposing such misuses and finally we
will talk a little bit about going
forward um uh how to think about
technology maybe in another way and
let's get to the problem
definition um many politicians are
talking about uh the current times as
the M multiple crises and it's not
always clear which crises are covered by
this um definition so maybe uh you
notice today that it was really hot we
just had the hottest J July since
120,000 years last month in Europe um
and that's due to climate change um I
think every one of you should know that
climate change is caused by climate
gases in the atmosphere which lead to
global warming um but I think a lot of
people are underestimating how far we
are already gone so right now our
current warming is about
1.1 de C and we on a very good path to
3° which would mean um extreme weather
incidences losing all coral reefs that
we have in the oceans and droughts
floods wildfires and changes in the
climate system that we can't take back
um but this is not the only crisis it's
it's just the one that I'm working the
most with we're also facing a crisis in
democracy for example as we can see in
the United States we are currently in
the third financial crisis in 15 years
and the war in Ukraine but also climate
change is leading to hunger all over the
world
um so
um and often we find that Tech is
proposed as a solution um but
first oh no
sorry um for example the uh liberal
Democratic party in Germany
is proposing that maybe everything could
be really easy because we know that a
lot of these crisis will uh need a lot
of policy changes that will be difficult
on all of us and we can see with the
recent heating law for example that
people are afraid of uh the
transformation um but what if tech could
just save us um this is something that
is proposed especially by the liberal
democrats for example and now we want to
start with this narrative but first um
with the
definitions okay yeah just uh to see
that we're on the common ground and
common uh um uh on the same page first
what is technology well uh Tech like the
Greek uh word actually means the
Practical ability to do something
without actually understanding how it
works or how you do it this could be in
case of knowledge for example reading
reading as a technology but also us
usually well usually how we use it here
in this context um it is artifacts so
tools or machines um to to do something
then we have fictions and this is there
we get to the core of um of our
discussion here of our presentation a
fiction is usually a narrative or
explanation with an imaginary element so
now the question is well narratives
usually open possibilities they make us
imagine um how things work and how to go
forward how we can talk about the
present but but also about the future so
now the discussion is if we hear a
certain Tech narrative is it a fiction
because it's imaginary or is it real so
the question is is it the tech solution
for a given problem or is that just
talking about technology by itself and
finally
sustainability or not finally sustain
sustainability uh we usually like that
the short definition of fulfilling one's
needs without impeding future
Generations ability to to to use the
same which means limiting the degrees of
freedom and uh um um fulfilling the
needs of future Generations usually in
the discourse which is quite useful um
analytical distinctions are ecological
social and economical sustainability
whereas ecological sustainability is the
Persistence of of life and uh nature um
and Flora and FAA the social um
sustainability affects the way how we
interact with each other uh as humans as
groups and finally the economical uh
sustainability is how to um distribute
resources scar resources and finally
social change well we as humans right
now do not live sustainably we know that
um and as we heard from R there there
are changes that need to be made in a
certain
way
okay and we found when we were
researching for those cases we found
there are actually two types of those
Tech discourse
uses uh we will give some examples uh
right away but type A is unusable Tech
we talk about technology that's actually
unusable um or unsuitable because other
usable Tech already exists so we're not
talking about the one that exists but we
talk about something that's
unsuitable the second case would be a
tech Focus discourse concerning purely
political issues so where the tech
discourse is not about the wrong
technology but where technology is not
solution at
all so talking about the first uh the
type a um discourses um the first
example uh we want to to bring up is
automated driving in inner cities what
is the promise well the promise is no
personal cars anymore and we have
basically cheap taxis for everyone how
does it work well we would we put
cameras computer sensors um and
navigation systems in the car and
finally we have a driverless
car but in reality there's so many
problems um concerning the technical
difficulties of recognizing the
environment uh sometimes the city
environment has to even be adjusted so
those things actually work and then
there is also people in the city a lot
of times as we see now the more and more
this kind of uh automated automated
Drive is uh driving is distributed a lot
of people are having fun stopping them
or putting cones on top and this is
something that cannot be really solved
in in a technical way so uh those cars
are blocking ways here and there well
what would be a good solution well we
have public transport of course we have
multimod model
Mobility um we have buses um and and so
on so the question is who profits
talking about those uh kind of automated
driving well of course the big
corporations doing the research there
it's the Googles the Ubers and the
Teslas the next example is the hydrogen
Heating so the promise is well let's
keep all our gas heatings in in place
and all the gas infrastructure but we'll
just power the gas heatings uh with
green hydrogen which is hydrogen that's
being created with uh renewable energy
how does it work well we keep uh the
heating we just change the source in a
certain way but what is the reality the
reality is that the production of this
kind of green hydrogen is highly
inefficient it takes away the available
hydrogen that needs to be used for other
parts of society or industry which can
only be powered by hydrogen and in the
end it is also important to say that
this kind of approach usually puts a lot
of stress on the global South because
those are the plans where the green
hydrogen should come from and it's even
Unsure how this kind of Technology can
even scale well what would be a good
solution at this point well we have for
example the heat pump it works
everywhere it seems except for Germany
well and who profits well it is as if
you analyze the situation it is the old
style energy and heating corporations
that try to argue for this keeping those
systems in place and finally um the
question of power uh talking about
unlimited clean energy for the future or
for now already like nuclear power or
Fusion well how does it work well either
we fuse or we split
atoms um get energy out of it but what
is the reality of this well it is very
expensive it's dependent from
dictatorships resources like uranium
it's centralized by default cannot be
decentralized and as part for Fusion it
is not re ready at least it's not ready
in the time frame of five or 10 years
which we needed to be ready uh to do
something about the climate catastrophe
moving on what would be a good solution
well remote Fusion we just have to put a
lot of those remote Fusion Harvesters
out there called solar
panels um we could also use wind wind
energy water energy it's all there the
technology is there it's usable it's it
can scale as we see in other parts of
the world but who profits talking about
nuclear energy or talking about Fusion
it's again big energy corporations
pushing the agenda because they know
once we we stay with nuclear power or we
turn it on or we go into Fusion those
systems can only be operated by really
really huge organizations and companies
they cannot be de decentralized so now
we get to the typ Ty B
Technologies
um okay ah um I think what is really
interesting about the type B
Technologies is that all the examples I
will list for you now are around for a
very long time already so um the first
one would be for example
cryptocurrencies I'm sure a lot of you
have already heard very good talks on
cryptocurrencies for example by Rina um
and you know that the that crypto
currency were first introduced in 2008
and the main idea was um make the
financial system more equal and more
transparent and um by using a
blockchainbased um
currency and what we've seen in the last
oh no is it working okay what but what
we've seen in the last I think almost 20
years is we haven't reached equality in
the financial markets what we have
reached are
is our currencies that make up about 25%
of all data center
power it's it's an estimation that are
highly volatile we saw this in El
Salvador who introduced uh Bitcoin as an
actual currency and is also ruled by a
lot of inequality of the people using it
so if we really want Financial equality
what would we need or what would we need
to uh prevent another financial crisis
such as 2008 well we should just reform
financial markets and really reform them
and reform hedge funds and private banks
for
example another example I'm sure you
heard about a lot especially by um by
environmental noos um is the idea of
well how could we provide food safety
for the whole world maybe we could use
genetically modified plants for example
and matching
pesticides um the idea would be to um
enhance plants with um um genetic
technology for example to be more
adapted to climate change or to improve
crop yields or to use a pesticides such
as glos which GL I'm sure a lot of you
know how glucoside works it just kills
everything it's called a total herbicide
but there are some plants that survive
that are genetically modified so um
worldwide we're using genetically
modified plants for around I think 20 or
30 years now and we still have hunger um
and we still didn't solve the problem of
food inequality because we don't have
the problem is not that we don't have
enough food the problem is the
distribution of food um and the pressure
on markets of food crops for example
actually the majority of the world is
living off of small Agriculture and
subsistence Agriculture and a lot of the
genetic Genetically Enhanced plants are
actually used for biofuels for example
so this would be the real solution if we
want want to tackle food safety as a
problem we have to support local farmers
and small farmers especially in the
global South um but the ones who
wouldn't profit from that would be the
big Agro agricultural corporations such
as Monsanto for example and the last one
it's actually my favorite because I
really like the idea um is carbon
capture and storage um maybe you heard
about carbon Capt capture and storage in
the '90s that was when the idea was
first introduced and we all already had
a lot of protests especially in Germany
on it and the idea is is really nice I
think for me it's always like I I
imagine how we could solve climate
change easily you just capture the CO2
in the industry plans um before it's
emitted into the atmosphere you just
capture it you
use if you can renewable energy a lot of
it to um change the form of the CO2 and
then you just store it in old gas and
oil fields and it's gone and we don't
have climate change anymore the problem
is this is not scalable
we have very very small used cases until
now and we know that the reemission of
this CO2 would be really dangerous
especially a lot of these oil fields are
in the oceans so it would destroy the
biodiversity in the oceans to store it
but also if it would be reemission but
also on land it would be very um it
would be very bad for the communities
and really dangerous so the solution to
end climate change would be stop using
fossil fuel
but who wouldn't profit of that well the
fossil fuel companies who are pushing
this solution for years
now
so this these are just a few
examples um am I saying yeah okay sorry
but there are a lot more for example the
use of AI right now uh as the solution
for basically anything for example um
and there are two main reason that we
identified in our work why these
narrative on te narratives on technology
are always um used in politics but are
also that powerful as they are so this
would be one staying in power and the
other other thing is having a very
limited understanding or an incompetence
um regarding technology so maybe you
heard it with all our examples um the
ones that are proposing these techn
fixes normally aren't startups or like
little farmers who are thinking about
how to tle climate change no these are
very old very rich corporations or maybe
in the case of
cryptocurrencies it's maybe a little bit
diff different but also people with a
lot of money behind them and the idea is
well they want to keep their power
Monsanto is one of the biggest um
agricultural companies and they want to
keep this position as well as the whole
fossil fuel industry who is responsible
for 77% almost of uh all emissions in
the atmosphere um and they also have the
money for the research so it's not easy
to get for example critical studies on
these things because they're financing
so many universities and research
institutes and the and strategically
they really profit from it even if the
solutions uh don't work because because
they hitch Haack our narratives um we
saw this with the heating law for
example we were really talking about
hydrogen heating for a long time and it
might not be a solution we don't know
but it kept us engaged and we discussed
it a lot it's the same thing with ccs
carbon capture and storage we know that
certain stones are not really usable for
it but you can discuss for month maybe
there's another Stone we can store it in
or something so they hit The Narrative
and take it away from the real solutions
that are mostly a lot
easier
okay okay and the second reason we found
was a wrong understanding of technology
and a wrong understanding of
society um the first the um and one
could say this this can also be again be
split up into two two kinds or two yeah
two kinds they always mix but there an
analytical difference the first one is
the actual discussed technology cannot
even fulfill the requirements so there's
misunderstanding what the technology can
or cannot do for example um in
blockchain or in some of those
especially the big AI applications for
getting uh information um and some a lot
of times the framework conditions for
applying this technology are not even
given so um the requirement analysis
itself is wrong there's a
misunderstanding how the technology
works and could be applied but the
second one is even um is even deeper I
would say it is a reduced understanding
of humans and Society itself um a lot of
ways when we talk about technology or we
have bigger and deeper technology
discussions uh discussions we come
across um those narratives that humans
are basically also just computers or for
example Society is just like a
collection of individual transactions
there is nothing nothing like you know
Society itself or every human is
rational and there's a homoeconomicus
um and then of course if I have such
reduced understanding of the world it is
actually the case that certain kinds of
Technologies that's the reason for
example with cryptocurrencies or even
the well-meaning um um uh blockchain
Community um why it the application
doesn't work because if I model Society
very reduced and very easy
then within this model it works to apply
technology but Society is usually very
very complex and then it fails so one
could say um the possible reasons are
maybe um um staying in power as R said
which is could be tagged as the evil um
and the wrong understanding is maybe the
well-meaning but in a certain way uh Inc
competent way so we but we do not want
to to uh to end on this note of course
but there are Solutions um in a certain
context and uh R will talk a bit about
this um I think I mean the solutions are
not easy but I think for me personally
they are also really hopeful and I think
spaces like the the camp for example are
very good examples of the solutions we
already have in our hands um we already
talked about some of them so one would
be just low Tech Solutions like public
transport small agriculture
regulation bikes um a democratization of
the economic system um but also societal
change like the way we live and interact
with each other the idea of degrowth and
Community which is something that I can
think we can already see for example in
this space a lot the use of renewable
energies really reduce emissions only
use um energy where we really need it um
and also look out for um financial
support for people that will suffer
under the transformation that is ahead
of us and also taking um or making
especially very rich people and big
companies
responsible um for the situation we are
in the the biggest polluters are the
richest 1% and just a few fossil fuel
companies for example and also something
that is really important is to offer
each
um security we can't survive crisises
alone we always need community and we
always need Collective Social Security
so that we can go to through tough times
together and um maybe to finish this uh
off it's a reminder reminder the
question is what problems are we
actually solving what kind of societies
do we want to to live in so the big
question is what is life about anyhow so
what what does make us happy um because
a lot of those changes that are maybe
being proposed here uh might get people
afraid somehow but there's a lot of
research on on happiness and U the
results somehow make us think about
different understandings of prosperity
and we should we should rethink the
standard of living what people need is
TR time prosperity for example to have
time to spend with the loved ones with
the things uh we want to do um
this is a discussion about working weeks
for example or the way of how we do work
in general um of course we need a
spatial Prosperity which means more
communal spaces public spaces um or also
you could say social Prosperity um
meaningful interconnections that also
sometimes means a limit of applying
technology certain ways so that means
all those changes we we like Al we we
mention throughout the presentations are
maybe sometimes technology that are
already there but also changes that
could could actually make a great future
um uh because those are all the things
uh slowing down getting more time space
and more uh interconnections those are
actually the things that make people
happy and that brings us
somehow uh to the conclusion well just
to sum it up Tech techn fixes blind and
distract our minds and slow down the
necessary change and now from what we've
learned our groupings and our
explanations I think uh one can
summarize well how to spot a technofix
first who proposes it if it comes of the
um incumbent of the current um economic
system then it is highly probably a
technofix and the second which is maybe
a little bit more
complex once there's a solution proposed
to ask what is the exact problem
definition and what is the exact
understanding how the technology could
actually tackle this and this could
sometimes mean that we see okay there's
an existing low Tech solution but why
don't we talk about this so those are
the two things how to spot how to spot a
technofix okay and then maybe um since
uh since we're here at a like the ks
communication Camp okay let's make
meaningful social change of course as we
do it and then talk about the usable
technology to actually apply it and then
we can play uh with our devices and uh
construct and work on the society we can
live on also the next Generations can
live on uh here we have some references
and thank
you
yeah thank you Rina
enri now we still have quite a lot of
time for Q&A so do you have any
questions okay I have to come to you
since I'm alone but hi uh first thanks
for the talk was amazing um I wanted to
ask about something um different similar
to CCS um carbon capture and storage I
researched a lot about that and I agree
with your take and I want want to know
what you think about direct air capture
because right now even if we were carbon
neutral there would still be too much
CO2 in the air do you think it's also a
techn fix or is that actually something
useful that we could use for the
future also of course with other things
not as something alone as a
solution is it working okay um I'm I'm
honestly uh I haven't researched a lot
about capture and I think it can be a
solution but a lot of the geoengineering
solutions that are
proposed
um a lot of the time they serve to not
apply the change we need so maybe you're
right and it could be like an addition
to other things I mean CCS could also be
an addition to other things we need it's
just not scalable and I think it depends
a lot on the discussion I think this
technology in itself maybe is not a bad
one and the question is
always um are we using resources and
time we need for other things in this
technology um if not maybe it's really
helpful I also have to say I have a very
great colleague her name is casine Mea
who researches a lot on that so maybe
you want to look into her work yeah but
this is um I mean we have a lot of like
geoengineering uh propositions like the
idea of uh solar sales in the atmosphere
to reflect the Sun or just just uh plant
whole uh forests or put in like water
plants in lakes that will absorb a lot
of CO2 and all these could be Solutions
but I personally think that they are
really scary and we don't know the
effects of of them and we shouldn't rely
on them now we have very good solutions
for change um which are a lot of them
are
also um socially a lot more or advancing
us socially a lot more towards equality
I would say thank you for your question
and and I would like to add um um as I
know the it's quite energy intensive to
do the air capture and now usually the
the um well the evasion is then to say
well we could use renewable energy of
course to do that um unfortunately we
are not at 100% renewable energy right
now so we have spare energy to actually
do that so until we're not at 100% doing
additional means would take away uh the
renewable energy which we have and which
is scars just to add some and yeah I
wanted also this this is a very good
point when we're talking about renewable
energy a common misconception that is
that we can scale renewable renewable
energy endlessly and we can't we can't
use all the land we have for solar
panels uh or
air or water power and it will if we we
have an increasing um usage of energy
we're using more energy each year this
is not changing and it has to change
because we don't have endless renewable
energy and maybe in Germany this won't
be a problem because we are already
establishing the relations with the
global South to use their solar power or
their wind power or their water power
but in the end it's one planet and the
capacities are limited so we have to say
what do we want to use the renewable
energy for that we have not en counting
all the resources that we need to for
example put up solar panels and um wind
engines for
example
hello hello I have a question regarding
Technologies who are maybe at the moment
not that good they are for example
better Alternatives available but some
technologies might be better in F future
how should we We handle this because we
all because if we only focus on the
existing Tech and so on or or Solutions
then we are we are we are we are staying
at the same
level um that is that is uh one of the
core questions why we did this uh um um
presentation um un fortunately we're not
in the situation where we say Let's uh
spend the next 100 years and then to see
like where we get and where can we like
uh what's nice nice Pathways and we cre
create scenarios according like all the
calculations to keep at least like
onethird of the planet still livable we
have to make those kind of changes and
right regarding emissions and um um um
slowing down um the global warming in
the next let's say five or maybe eight
years so I think it's a really um it's a
really good and fruitful discussion to
think about what to do afterwards and to
plan ahead for the future may maybe you
whatever whatever you had in mind for
this question but um the core of our
presentation is let's not make this an
evasion from the changes that are
necessary right now so we should work on
that and it's fun and it's really it's
really nice but we need to put
priorities you know first the work and
then and then or maybe you know
resources maybe 90% there and 10% there
but let's not make it appear that the
future thinking will will should be the
the core so this would be um at least my
answer yeah I think you're um I have a
colleague who works on um Agriculture
and like um technology to genetically
enhance plants and she always says well
it's really fun to do research it is I
mean we just just found this new way to
enhance like to genetically enhance
plants or uh organisms this Cris pacas
but we have the same problems we had
before we just found a new way to do it
and I think this is really fun and I
think it's very human to want to invent
things and to move things
forward um but I think
um we have to keep in mind that
sometimes it's just fun to discover
things that doesn't mean that we have to
apply them and that they are a solution
I think that's this is very applicable
also in the whole blockchain discourse
the idea of we have this technology
let's use it for
something do you have a problem for my
blockchain even well I would summarize
it yes to playing with things yeah
definitely hey next
question uh yeah thanks I really like um
the idea of or like
like that these techn fixes are a
narrative that uh for example if I work
at a company with large established
interests and I want to slow down some
kind of change that threatens my bottom
line um I can just throw in like some
some technology that sounds like vaguely
plausible like it could solve a problem
and then um and then really try to push
for this and that way hijack the public
debate and like this meaning that this
will be discussed for a very long time
and the right things don't get discussed
and I think I mean being aware of this
is maybe one way of um of stopping this
but do you have any other ideas for how
how you can then deal with this
situation like maybe a message for
people working like for journalists uh
or people working in media like what do
you do because you don't want to respond
to it
basically um I think this is a very good
question because I for example as
sometimes I am sometimes invited to like
um talks with politicians and they ask
very specific things about there was for
example uh Hearing in the bundist t uh
regarding I think it was called
metaverse blockchain and web web 3 and
so we you just talk about the
technology um and a lot of the times
you're just talking about how can you
use this technology you're not talking
about why should we use this technology
and what would be a better solution and
I think this is very hard to take this
leap because especially politicians are
for example they have the theme to work
on blockchain and they don't want to
hear well we need financial regulations
then they tell you well this is the work
of my colleague who does uh Economic
Policy I work on digital policy and I
want to work towards blockchain so I
think trying to have an like an
integrated View and always bringing up
like other low Tech solutions would be a
way maybe but it's difficult and that's
why these narratives are so powerful
because you're when you're talking about
self-driving cars you're not talking
about bicycles and the people that want
to talk about self-driving cars don't
want to talk about bicycles for
example yeah and
um I think I the question was also
concerning especially the media right
working working in journalism um I think
there maybe two cases one is where the
media outlet has a has a narrative of
itself you know if we look at right-wing
whatever um of course they want to take
every piece and like pollute the whole
uh discourse but if there's really um
let's say an an
honest and yeah an honest urge to cover
those topics I think a lot of cases uh
there are experts um and it's I think
it's always a good idea to get some
opinions ask NOS who work who have been
working on those topics for 30 years um
of course it in the in the whole media
logic it's if I say oh yeah well just do
some more research that of course that's
that's not a good hint but um maybe
sometimes there are experts that are
maybe not so financially able to to be
public by themselves it's really if you
talk about technology well um maybe get
some interviews from your local hacker
space uh if if they do certain
technological things or ask smaller NOS
who has been working have been working
or maybe um find uh NOS who are active
in the global South who who originate
from there like we heard you know if if
if some politician says well it's
actually really nice Fusion or whatever
well um to ask yourself well is it is
that really not not just report what
people said but bring the context with
it um I I don't know if that's an
helpful answer but uh this is um
yeah hi yeah thanks for your talk um um
my question would also go in a similar
Direction you spoke about how
especially big corporations amass a lot
of wealth and a lot of power how do we
build the counterpower
to oppose these techn fixes and to not
only react to them but maybe also to get
into the offensive and uh make make
different proposals for
Solutions it's a very easy question to
be honest so um well that's basically
the core question um I would
say in a lot of places where those kind
of decisions are being made for example
in Germany we still it's still kind of a
more so so working democracy so we need
to find um majorities somehow gain
political pressure and um I think if we
look at if you look for a lot of surveys
people see there's a pressing need for
change so a lot of within the population
um people are not St stupid or not they
don't understand a lot of that's that's
not the case people know there's a
problem there's something needs to be
done about it and maybe there's some
some work that has to be done on
narratives to say for example the the
social uh social just implementation of
such policy so when we say how about
carbon tax of €600 per ton of course
everyone's afraid but this is what but
the discussion would be a good one to
say how about the carbon tax together
with the climate money uh the target
carbon tax that's being distributed
equally among all the other citizens so
that means big polluters have a net loss
and little polluters have a net positive
of course those kind of discussions
usually get medially attacked in the
media by all those you but but this kind
of grouping those uh issues together to
say yeah to to to let people who want
this kind of change to see ah yeah
people proposing this technology or this
change have in mind the struggles I have
I think this could be one small uh bit
to like to go forward in this way and
then to build alliances and majorities
and then yeah Afflicted change and also
we know historically I mean a lot of
what what um what we're first doing is
pushing back the techn fixes and not
like pushing the new Solutions just
pushing back and this is
exhausting um but I think we have a lot
of experience with social movements
pushing against techn fixes for example
we live in a country where we don't have
um a lot of genetically uh modified
plants that are um allowed to be used um
that and that's uh something um that
that like uh the environmental movement
fought for for Years also that
CCS uh couldn't be implemented in the
'90s were also due to massive protests
so um or for example one of my favorite
example at the um
thish the shareholder meeting of B more
than the half of the people talking are
actually people from Civil Society um
dismantling um human rights abuses um
and this is like this is the work we
need
but often it's not enough but actually
this is a very good place because you
are the people who can propose other
Solutions that's something really nice
about the CCC
so okay um so I'm I wanted to extend a
little bit more on what you were just
going into the direction that you went
um so counter power or counter
narratives the creation of that um since
I think the two points that you
mentioned that the difficulty that uh we
face I would add a third point and
that's the convenience factor right
technology is always seems to be
convenient makes our lives easier at
least that's the narrative so if you
want to convince people or lure our
fellow citizen into a degrowth narrative
which I think you alluded to a little
bit that the growth is I guess the
obvious solution right so okay so how
how um do we do that do you have maybe
more examples you already touched on the
point of maybe we have to work less I
think that's a strong narrative um do
you have other examples that you know
can help us really convince folks about
this to be the path
I think um that's a difficult question I
think there are very very good ideas for
a
transformation like towards degrowth I
think one of the most important aspects
that we currently fail to do is like
paint a beautiful future after the
transformation so um right now we always
we're talking about like policies
against climate change and it always
feels like scarcity it makes people
scared they're afraid to be left behind
and being able to to show and to propose
solution that actually feel like a
positive future is super important and
we already have that I mean the 9o
ticket that we had in Germany last
summer that's perfect it's such a good
policy measure for uh like a climate
solution obviously we need more public
transport and everything but it really
worked and it really helped people um
with uh like with less income the most
that's brilliant but we're not able to
make like narratives that show that
really everybody can profit and can be
happy in the world that is coming and I
think that's the problem and if we
manage that then degrow will be a lot
easier easier and maybe one one last
comment for this uh degrowth for example
if if you mention it it it doesn't mean
everything is shrinking right it sounds
like oh my God I will only eat half as
half as much food or whatever but of
course degrowth is a is a net concept
some areas might grow it might be I
don't know the care uh the care Work
Care areas care Indy I industry I don't
know if that's the thing or recreational
aspects you know it's a question of
focus some areas might be getting
smaller and others are growing so
already calling it deg growth in general
is maybe a narrative that does not
connect with people are not um um who
are not you know uh working on this the
whole time I don't know what would be a
good term like balanced re not I don't
know okay we maybe we'll discuss this
over a bit
now okay thank you thank you thank you
again for your your talk but you but
you're we're sadly out of time but
you're for sure uh able to uh to give
them answers once you were able to get
all uh to to finish up here and and uh
please another round of applause for R
and
[Applause]
[Music]
Rina