[Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > [Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

«‹›1934 »

(Thread IKs: Stereotype)

bowser: Apr 7, 2007

bobmarleysghost posted:

i popped over to d&d's climate thread and laughed at that post. pretty deranged to be lauding BP as "doing something good"

bowser has issued a correction as of 17:13 on Oct 6, 2021

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 12:24

Mayor Dave: Feb 20, 2009; Bernie the Snow Clown

bobmarleysghost posted:

i popped over to d&d's climate thread and laughed at that post. pretty deranged to be lauding BP as "doing something good"

I clicked through and wow it's even worse over there than I remember

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:11

Rectal Death Adept: Jun 20, 2018; by Fluffdaddy

bobmarleysghost posted:

i popped over to d&d's climate thread and laughed at that post. pretty deranged to be lauding BP as "doing something good"

it's that raw cope that can never really be defeated if someone is dishonest enough to start out from the position that they have to believe it. They decided the answer they wanted before the specifics ever got involved

BP says

quote:

Gas & low energy (G&LCE) integrates our existing natural gas capabilities with significant growth in low and zero carbon businesses and markets. We will:

Invest in and build renewable energy capacity of 20 gigawatts by 2025 and 50 gigawatts by 2030
Grow our integrated gas portfolio, including equity gas, LNG and merchant portfolio
Further develop our bioenergy offer solutions for aviation, marine and heavy-duty transportation
Create a distinctive position in hydrogen and CCUS, including 10% market share of hydrogen in core markets
Drive new decarbonization technologies and capabilities to create innovative zero carbon energy solutions

So if you ignore the undefined marketing speak they are claiming they will

Invest in making 4% of the nations current energy requirements in renewable energy over the next decade
Grow their portfolio of gas?
10% target market share in hydrogen "core markets"

while they continue to pollute and make billions off of fossil fuels in amounts that make these mitigations even more worthless than if they were done by a company that was carbon neutral?

This is just "doing something must be doing something" a raw and desperate flailing to believe the problem has a solution and someone is taking steps toward it

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:12

Mayor Dave: Feb 20, 2009; Bernie the Snow Clown

bowser posted:

Incredible.

https://twitter.com/PescaWWF/status/1294560906668580864?s=20
https://twitter.com/PescaWWF/status/1294560927388504064?s=20

The dutch paintings here are one of many shifting baselines covered in The Once And Future Earth, which is an immensely depressing read

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:16

RIP Syndrome: Feb 24, 2016

The shark's doing good work

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:32

Stevie Lee: Oct 8, 2007

here's an app you brokebrained doomers can use to fight climate change (which isn't even bad yet)
https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1445766771944820750

quote:

Good Empire (iOS, Android) is a new social app whose mission is “to gather, unite, and empower an empire of good humans to save the f**king world.” Good Empire features challenges that highlight direct actions individuals can take to help reduce their carbon emissions and plastic waste, address hunger and poverty in their communities and around the world, and empower women and girls. Actions must have measurable impacts and are aligned with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Good Empire just launched in September 2021.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 17:52

sitchensis: Mar 4, 2009

If you live in the Pacific Northwest and you know what second growth forest looks like, it�s hard not to get super depressed as you walk around literally everywhere and see it.

Second growth forest, of course, is the type of forest that grows after industrial logging activities has wiped out all the �Old Growth� forest (aka forest untouched by humans) that used to be there. It�s often homogenous, spindly, and pretty anemic from an ecological perspective.

It�s also fun to encounter tourists and locals alike who marvel at the majesty and beauty of second growth forests, as they have no conception of what was there before. It feels like watching people marvel at the silvicultural equivalent of an overgrown cornfield in the Midwest. What�s even better is seeing car ads filmed in-and-around British Columbia where Jeeps vroom-vroom over a forest road that is clearly in the middle of a cutblock logged in the 1940s and making it out to be some rugged final frontier untamed landscape poo poo.

Anyways, there is very little old growth forest left in the PNW and what is there is likely going to be clearcut or die off in the next century so lol I guess.

If you are lucky enough to have the opportunity to see some of it without needing to fly on a commercial jet, I highly suggest you do so because it really is quite spectacular and sacred.

sitchensis has issued a correction as of 18:07 on Oct 6, 2021

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:03

Pryor on Fire: May 14, 2013; they don't know all alien abduction experiences can be explained by people thinking saving private ryan was a documentary

The logging doesn't matter that much. There is zero logging where I live because there are no sawmills within financial distance, but the forest is dying anyway between the ever escalating droughts and the beetles and the lower growth rates and the fires.

Might as well cut down the big old redwoods, they are going to burn in the next few years anyway.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:30

Paradoxish: Dec 19, 2003; Will you stop going crazy in there?

Stevie Lee posted:

here's an app you brokebrained doomers can use to fight climate change (which isn't even bad yet)
https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1445766771944820750

hahahaha oh my god we're so loving dead

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:31

IAMKOREA: Apr 21, 2007

bowser posted:

Incredible.

This is a fun hashtag:
https://twitter.com/GillBraulik/status/1255901375994748928?s=20

https://twitter.com/ProfTerryHughes/status/1374221756097986561?s=20
https://twitter.com/JezRoff/status/1445773010737131537?s=20
https://twitter.com/ProfTerryHughes/status/1362631963706675201?s=20

https://twitter.com/NashTurley/status/998209801636208640?s=20

https://twitter.com/Signe_Dalsgaard/status/1405146764865425413?s=20

https://twitter.com/70sBachchan/status/1195848334834954243?s=20

https://twitter.com/Seasaver/status/1399758307464728578?s=20
https://twitter.com/PescaWWF/status/1294560906668580864?s=20
https://twitter.com/PescaWWF/status/1294560927388504064?s=20

Well this post made me feel like poo poo, thanks

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:42

Perry Mason Jar: Feb 24, 2006; "Della? Take a lid"

Paradoxish posted:

hahahaha oh my god we're so loving dead

They only print that stuff to make me want to kill myself. Hang in there.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:45

Tekne: Feb 15, 2012; It's-a me, motherfucker

Mayor Dave posted:

The dutch paintings here are one of many shifting baselines covered in The Once And Future Earth, which is an immensely depressing read

im digging the seal pup in every painting who is obviously the fish market�s �pet�

you can still see that today at places that welcome flipper bois

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:45

Stevie Lee: Oct 8, 2007

Pryor on Fire posted:

The logging doesn't matter that much. There is zero logging where I live because there are no sawmills within financial distance, but the forest is dying anyway between the ever escalating droughts and the beetles and the lower growth rates and the fires.

Might as well cut down the big old redwoods, they are going to burn in the next few years anyway.

I'm imagining how many emails my coworkers could print out with just a single redwood

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:48

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Stevie Lee posted:

here's an app you brokebrained doomers can use to fight climate change (which isn't even bad yet)
https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1445766771944820750

lets check out some of these apps

https://www.earthhero.org/app/

quote:

3. We support quick, simple, �easy� personal actions, as they may help shift the culture within a household or change a local community, but they also count in motivating people towards further action.

4. Many types of climate actions exist; we are building tools to help people tailor actions to their particular situations as they learn about potential actions. We understand that people may only be able to carry out select actions at times depending on their personal situation, such as health, employment, and more. We support all actions at any level, and then encourage further actions of any level or variety but that may expand a person�s impact. Adopting a new habitat is a learning process, so we created our rating system to help individuals select the level of ambition they can embrace.

5. Earth Hero does not subscribe to the philosophy that only one action will yield the majority of climate emission reduction or cultural impact at the scale needed. For instance, a rapid reduction of the human population size or the promotion of nuclear power will not be enough by themselves to turn the tide. The combination of a variety of actions is possible and needed and includes the action levels possible for an individual.
6. We respect and understand that more than one political party in any particular nation can present a climate change solution(s). Earth Hero is nonpartisan and does not engage in any lobbying activity.
7. Earth Hero does not encourage violent or illegal civil disobedience.

https://goodempire.org/about/ - note this isn't a non-profit, but a startup founded by a wine delivery CEO

quote:

Millions, billions of people and organisations around the world know this, and care, and want to see change.

And yet, we don�t. Change. Us. You and me.

We don�t feel empowered. It�s hard. It�s inconvenient. And we don�t really believe that our impact can make much of a difference.
But it can.

I spent the last 12 years as co-founder and CEO of Vinomofo, which we built from my garage into a pretty successful global business, which I was really proud of, in a lot of ways.

But I found myself growing more and more concerned by the state of the world, and I couldn�t just keep complaining about it at dinner parties.
I wanted to do something to help.

Wanted to be able to say to my kids that I did something to try to help.

And so I left Vinomofo, and I founded Good Empire, and started trying to figure out how to best help save the f**king world.

I thought surely someone has a vision, a strategy for how to fix the world, and I was drawn to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030 and beyond, and I thought �well good, that�s a good, comprehensive strategy. That would be good for the world. How can I help?�

I also realised that there were plenty of people and organisations in the world who also cared, but just weren�t doing much about it.

So I started gathering a team of fiercely passionate and aligned people and we set out to solve a very specific problem:

https://brightly.eco/ - just an affiliate link system for green washed consumer products, also a startup not a non-profit

quote:

conscious consumers will find it even easier to discover sustainable products and eco-friendly lifestyle tips thanks to a recent $1 million investment into start-up company Brightly from investors. After experiencing substantial growth over the past year, Brightly has become the number one destination for millennial and Gen Z women who want to make a difference through informed purchase decisions.

Brightly is a female-founded startup combining content, community, and commerce to scale conscious consumerism. Founded in 2019 by Laura Alexander Wittig and Liza Moiseeva, the company has raised $1.15 million to date by approaching sustainable living from a practical point of view. Both women are e-commerce veterans with experience at Amazon, Google, and GlobeIn, the first fair trade subscription box.

https://www.klima.com/ - offsets purchasing app! also a startup,

quote:

Klima was founded to create the biggest possible impact for the climate � collectively and individually. Here�s how that breaks down financially:

10% running cost: To make Klima possible, we use 10% of what we make to cover our running costs including IT development, project selection, and infrastructure.

70% individual impact: This goes directly to your personal offsetting projects, making sure you�re carbon-neutral from day one. These funds plant trees, expand solar energy access, and provide clean cookstoves to thousands.

20% collective impact: No one can solve climate change alone. That�s why we invest 20% into impact marketing, aka spreading the word and getting more people involved. That way each user multiplies their own impact by reaching others. Read more on our collective impact strategy here.

the list of projects that Kilma includes as generating carbon offsets includes wood burning, recycling paper, and burning trash.

https://ecologi.com/ - tree planting, also a for-profit company. all you need to see is just this one line:

quote:

Become climate positive for less than $2.75 per week

yup, you can keep doing all the same stuff, just pay $3 and bam, climate change is solved!

https://www.ecosia.org/ -also for profit, search engine that throws some revenue towards planting trees

quote:

By planting trees and offsetting its energy use with renewables, each search with Ecosia actually removes 1 kg of CO2 from the air, which makes Ecosia a carbon-negative search engine. Here�s the math: an average search generates around 0.005 � of revenue. It costs roughly 0.25 � to plant a tree, which means that Ecosia can plant one tree every 50 searches. On average, these trees will each remove 50 kg of CO2 during an expected 15 year lifetime.

This means that if Ecosia were as big as Google, it could absorb 15% of all global CO2 emissions! That�s enough to offset vehicle emissions worldwide.

if only everyone used this search engine, then we wouldn't have to change our transportation structure at all!

https://www.ecoanxious.ca/ - i believe the ruder posters itt would call this "cope central". affiliated with a consulting firm that works on making you a "climate leader"

quote:

Welcome friend. You're not alone.

Feeling worry and fear about the climate crisis? You�re not alone. Instead of getting stuck in a sense of powerlessness, we�re supporting each other to transform our eco-anxieties into meaningful action grounded in courage and compassion.

https://climateawakening.org/ - another conversation platform, this time funded by the advocacy group https://www.theclimatemobilization.org which does have both Michael Mann, Adam McKay and the heir to the Getty fortune on the board, so who knows....

quote:

Let's break the silence.
Share your climate terror, grief, and rage with people who understand.
Join a Climate Emotions Conversation - a small group sharing & listening session about the climate emergency.

Trabisnikof has issued a correction as of 19:10 on Oct 6, 2021

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:49

mediaphage: Mar 22, 2007; Excuse me, pardon me, sheer perfection coming through

IAMKOREA posted:

Well this post made me feel like poo poo, thanks

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:55

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Rectal Death Adept posted:

when people talk about holding politicians accountable they should also list all of the times politicians have been held accountable in the past 20 years

politicians only tend to be held accountable every century or so

# ? Oct 6, 2021 18:56

Perry Mason Jar: Feb 24, 2006; "Della? Take a lid"

You can't hold politicians accountable because they're not accountable to you. Everyone doing lesser evil voting for decades now has made that only more true but it's always been the case. How in the world can someone hold Joe Biden accountable? How? Through what mechanism? Who?

There are only three effective methods of accountability in human history that we know of: bullets, nooses, and guillotines.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:09

Decades: Apr 12, 2007; College Slice

Perry Mason Jar posted:

There are only three effective methods of accountability in human history that we know of: bullets, nooses, and guillotines.

Ridiculous. Why limit ourselves? There's a whole world of constructive approaches out there, from incineration to defenestration.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:16

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Perry Mason Jar posted:

There are only three effective methods of accountability in human history that we know of: bullets, nooses, and guillotines.

thats not true at all
:eng101:

Phalaris was roasted alive in a bronze bull
Aristomachos of Argos was tortured to death
Amastris was drowned by her own sons
Crassis was fed molten gold
Coes of Mytilene was stoned to death...

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:17

Perry Mason Jar: Feb 24, 2006; "Della? Take a lid"

Rutibex posted:

thats not true at all

Phalaris was roasted alive in a bronze bull
Aristomachos of Argos was tortured to death
Amastris was drowned by her own sons
Crassis was fed molten gold
Coes of Mytilene was stoned to death...

In Prague there were windows!

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:21

mediaphage: Mar 22, 2007; Excuse me, pardon me, sheer perfection coming through

Rutibex posted:

thats not true at all

Phalaris was roasted alive in a bronze bull
Aristomachos of Argos was tortured to death
Amastris was drowned by her own sons
Crassis was fed molten gold
Coes of Mytilene was stoned to death...

new edward gorey soundin lit

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:28

Cold on a Cob: Feb 6, 2006; i've seen so much, i'm going blind
and i'm brain dead virtually; College Slice

RIP Syndrome posted:

Logging on today with a sudden 30 new messages in the other thread. Oh boy, I'm saving those for last.

the quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

C̸̵̡̘̙̫̦̈́͆̿̀͘̚͜O̸̵̠̝̼͍̼͐̈́̽͠͝͝M̴̵̢̼̦̘̙̿̾͌͊͐̈́͜E̴̴̢̡͓͙̻͔͐̈́̾̽̈́͠ J̸̵̪̞̠͕͚͑͆̓̽͘͜O̵̵̘̙͓͍̝̞͛̾͌͑̽̒I̸̵̡̼͕̻̟͒͒̔́͌̕N̴̴̢͇̙̫̫̪͆̈́̔͐̈́͘ Ú̵̵̢̢̫͉̻̒̽͋͜͝S̴̴̢̡̼̙̦͉̐͊́͒͊͑

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:42

actionjackson: Jan 12, 2003

from bad thread

VideoGameVet posted:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-deniers-shift-tactics-to-inactivism/

quote:

Climate Deniers Shift Tactics to 'Inactivism'
After detailing the systematic efforts to block action on climate in the book, you say that you are optimistic. What makes you hopeful?

We�re not going to get a Green New Deal, not from this Congress. But we might get a climate bill that involves market mechanisms, as well as incentives. President-elect Joe Biden is pretty pragmatic on this. He�s appointed John Kerry [as special presidential envoy for climate], who is capable of pulling that off. I think we�re headed toward some kind of market approach to dealing with climate.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:44

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

like considering how insanely capitalistic and pro-market all politicians and power brokers are in the USA, it is a testament to how much markets suck at dealing with climate change that non-market solutions get discussed at all.

like they just can't make the numbers work, no matter how hard they try. like the $3 a week saves the climate people undercut the $1,000 carbon tax people, who undercut the "tax breaks for big business" people, who undercut the $3 a week people. their individual greed keeps exposing the collective market failure.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:48

Cold on a Cob: Feb 6, 2006; i've seen so much, i'm going blind
and i'm brain dead virtually; College Slice

Decades posted:

Canadian Professor of climate science quits her job to rededicate herself to lmao:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/first-person-climate-change-education-support-young-people-1.6186611

nothing like grinding out 14-16 hour days several weeks to untangle the source code of a hairy piece of legacy software and then have my boss start rambling about The Great Reset at lunch

is hould email him this article and ask him how he's gonna explain to his teenage kids how we've hosed around for 50 years and now it's time for them to find out

:unsmigghh:

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:49

Rectal Death Adept: Jun 20, 2018; by Fluffdaddy

"To even begin to try and limit some of the damage, eventually we need to buckle down..."

*cheers*

"...And stop worrying about profit"

*boos, hisses*

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:52

Hexigrammus: May 22, 2006; Cheech Wizard stories are clean, wholesome, reflective truths that go great with the marijuana munchies and a blow job.

sitchensis posted:

It�s also fun to encounter tourists and locals alike who marvel at the majesty and beauty of second growth forests, as they have no conception of what was there before. It feels like watching people marvel at the silvicultural equivalent of an overgrown cornfield in the Midwest. What�s even better is seeing car ads filmed in-and-around British Columbia where Jeeps vroom-vroom over a forest road that is clearly in the middle of a cutblock logged in the 1940s and making it out to be some rugged final frontier untamed landscape poo poo.

This is definitely true in Haida Gwaii. Really cool scenery but when you get off the boat and walk into the woods you'll find the huge spruce stumps from all the trees that were removed in WWII and shipped south to build airplanes.

I've been doing some historical research looking at old photographs of the Fraser delta. Amazing how much forest was still left near the airport in the 1940s. At that point it was just a lot of scraggly second growth and leftovers from earlier logging but still.

Tekne posted:

im digging the seal pup in every painting who is obviously the fish market�s �pet�

you can still see that today at places that welcome flipper bois

Haha, I missed that. My eyes just slid over her as part of the menu.

I was at a research lab that had one of those. She'd show up at the dock any time gear was being loaded, just in case something tasty slipped through the scuppers. She also spent time testing the fish farm's defences and keeping the technicians on their toes.

Pryor on Fire posted:

The logging doesn't matter that much. There is zero logging where I live because there are no sawmills within financial distance, but the forest is dying anyway between the ever escalating droughts and the beetles and the lower growth rates and the fires.

Might as well cut down the big old redwoods, they are going to burn in the next few years anyway.

Working on it. Just the drought killed cedars though. They've only been growing since the initial logging in this area 100+ years ago. I'm leaving the stumps to help protect new growth from over-enthusiastic mowers. Who needs Icelandic sheep when you have John Deere tractors and Brush Hogs?

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:55

Homocow: Apr 24, 2007; Extremely bad poster!
DO NOT QUOTE!; Pillbug

a rube-goldberg machine of mental gymnastics to avoid admitting capitalism is responsible the climate crisis

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:57

err: Apr 11, 2005; I carry my own weight no matter how heavy this shit gets...

Personally I'm holding out for the app that connects and gives directions to users to their local oil pipeline and coal train railroad.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:58

Harold Fjord: Jan 3, 2004

Homocow posted:

a rube-goldberg machine of mental gymnastics to avoid admitting capitalism is responsible the climate crisis

"But Communists also pollute"

# ? Oct 6, 2021 19:58

Hubbert: Mar 25, 2007; At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

As I'm 100% certain that I would be banned for posting this elsewhere on SA, please see the following excerpt from Andreas Malm's How To Blow Up A Pipeline:

Note that I am only providing this quote for the purpose of academic discussion and for no other reason:

quote:

Another few cases notwithstanding, the movement has by and large left property destruction an untried tactic. What if it became more than a one-off occurrence? What if hundreds or thousands followed in the footsteps of Reznicek and Montoya? On what grounds could that be cause for regret and condemnation? One might argue that it would open the dams of violence, or even ad lib terrorism. As for the former, Reznicek and Montoya hotly dispute that their actions fell into that category: �The oil being taken out of the ground and the machinery that does it and the infrastructure which supports it � this is violent�, Reznicek stated in an interview. �We never at all threatened human life. We�re acting in an effort to save human life, to save our planet, to save our resources. And nothing was ever done by Ruby or me outside of peaceful, deliberate and steady loving hands.� In the Catholic Worker tradition, ennobled by the Berrigan brothers who used blood and napalm to destroy draft files during the Vietnam War and spoiled nuclear warheads during the late Cold War, righteous property destruction falls within the boundaries of non-violence.

The position has scriptural support. Jesus Christ was no stranger to the tactic: the Gospel of John tells us that he became so infuriated at the sight of money-changers raking in profit from selling cattle in the temple that he used �a whip of cords� to drive them all out, before pouring out their coins and overturning their tables. Some support can also be found in secular philosophy. It has been argued that the similarity between breaking the bone of a child and breaking the bone of a table is deceptive: only the child can feel pain. Only she can be traumatised, only her dignity violated; the table is devoid of interests and mental states. Physical force that injures inanimate objects does not, on this view, count as violence, because it cannot have the results that constitute the prima facie wrongness of what we call violence. At a minimum, those on the receiving end must be sentient beings.

Far more common, however, is the opposite view. One much-cited philosophical essay says that violence �is always done, and it is always done to something, typically a person, animal, or piece of property�. The latter class of objects � windows, automobiles, places of business � might be subjected to breaking, burning, stone-throwing and an array of other violent acts. But what about the ordered demolition of a dilapidated house, or the controlled burning of a garden patch? To meet the criteria, the physical attacks damaging or destroying property have to be �highly vigorous, or incendiary, or malicious�, the latter the weightiest attribute. In a similar vein, Ted Honderich defines political violence as �a use of physical force that injures, damages, violates or destroys people or things, with a political and social intention�. Chenoweth and Stephan submit that �violent tactics include bombings, shootings, kidnappings, physical sabotage such as the destruction of infrastructure, and other types of physical harm of people and property�, which makes it even more impressive that they can name a single case of nonviolence. The fall of the Berlin Wall? People didn�t caress the cement.

But strategic pacifists are right in asserting that in the eyes of the public, in the early twenty-first century and particularly in the global North, property destruction does tend to come off as violent. Likewise, most people would think of a whip of chords as a weapon and the chasing away of money-changers and overturning of their tables as a minor whirlwind of violence. One should not succumb to an argumentum ad populum, but neither should one ascribe meaning to words that deviate too much from the common language. If we were to exclude objects from the definition of violence, we would have to try to convince the world that a crowd of Gilets Jaunes marching down the Champs-�lys�es and pulverising every retail store along the way would in fact be practising non-violence � more than a conceptual stretch, a waste of rhetorical effort.

We must accept that property destruction is violence, insofar as it intentionally exerts physical force to inflict injury on a thing owned by someone who does not want it to happen (such as Rick Perry and his fellow Energy Transfer shareholders). But in the very same breath, we must insist on it being different in kind from the violence that hits a human (or an animal) in the face, for the reasons just specified: one cannot treat a car cruelly or make it cry. It has no rights truncated in the moment of incineration. Some harm befalls the person behind the car � the driver, the owner � who is prevented from using it as he wishes. But it would be something else to set fire to him. Martin Luther King � his moral compass a wonder of reliability next to Gandhi�s � endorsed this distinction in his apologia for the urban riots of 1967: �Violent they certainly were. But the violence, to a startling degree, was focused against property rather than against people�, and within the genus of violent acts, this made all the difference: �A life is sacred. Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being.� Why were the rioters �so violent with property then? Because property represents the white power structure, which they were attacking and trying to destroy.�

On the standard view, which also seems to be King�s, an inanimate object can undergo violence by virtue of being property � standing in a relation, that is, to a human being, who can claim to be indirectly hurt when it is hurt. Shattering a rusty chassis discarded on a dumpsite would scarcely be violent, since no one would be around to sustain the loss. But this indirectness is also what sets property destruction apart, for one cannot equate the treatment of people with the treatment of the things they own. Even the man most deeply in love with his car should admit that slicing up its tyres and slicing up his lungs come with separate ethical tags. Only the most extreme form of bourgeois fetishism � claiming that the owned object is in fact animate � could muster a case against this differentiation. There is, however, one exception, one type of property destruction that approaches killing and maiming, namely that which hits material conditions for subsistence: poisoning someone�s groundwater, burning down a family�s last remaining grove of olive trees or, for that matter, firebombing a paddy field in an Indian peasant village because it emits methane would come close to a stab in the heart. At the other end of the spectrum is the blasting of a superyacht into smithereens.

Now if we accept that property destruction is violence, and that it is less grave than violence against humans, this in itself neither condemns nor condones the practice. It seems that it ought to be avoided for as long as possible. Even a revolutionary Marxist should regard it as prima facie wrong, because private property is the form in which capitalism snares productive forces that often � although at a falling rate � cater to some human needs. We would not want a situation where people went around throwing bricks into caf�s and toppling school walls and slitting jackets on a whim, just for the hell of it. Highly pressing circumstances must rather be present for attacks on property to come under consideration. Then begins the act of balancing.

�Is not a woman�s life, is not her health, are not her limbs more valuable than panes of glass?� asked Emmeline Pankhurst. Or, in the words of one philosopher mulling over violent civil disobedience: if a grossly immoral war is being waged, the right of railway engineers to keep the tracks in good shape may be superseded by �the more important right of the people in the country to which the troops are headed, to life itself�. In the climate breakdown, the scales might tip quickly � on the one side, things like pipelines and diggers and SUVs; on the other, a weight that must tend towards the infinite because it encompasses all values. A woman�s life, her health and limbs, the right of a people to life itself and everything else is in peril. Because of the temporal dimension, moreover, Pankhurst�s question must also be posed from the standpoint of future generations: will those in school today or born next year grow up to think that the machines of the fossil economy were accorded insufficient respect? Or will they look back on this moment in time rather like we, or at least those of us with a modicum of feminist leanings, look back on the suffragettes and see smashed windows as a price worth paying? But when suffragettes broke panes, torched letterboxes and hammered on paintings, these things had, in and of themselves, at most a tangential relation to the problem of male monopoly on the vote. Now the machines of the fossil economy are the problem.

One might turn to contemporary scholarship on civil disobedience and political violence for further guidance. William Smith, one of the most astute theorists, has recently turned his attention to direct action along the lines of �occupations, sabotage, property damage and other types of force� designed to dissuade opponents from proceeding with their plans and deter them from duplicating their efforts. He regards this taxon of action as distinct from civil disobedience, with its emphasis on moral suasion. When could it ever be justified? He sets up three criteria.

First,

quote:
direct action should be limited to disrupting practices that might result in, or imminently threaten to generate, serious and irreversible harm. The urgency of the situation might be sufficient to override a presumption in favour of lawful advocacy or civil disobedience, if too much damage would occur before the process of reflection and reconsideration triggered by the latter could run its course.

It should be noted that this argument is not tailored for the climate crisis, which receives no mention.

Second, there must be grounds for believing that mellower tactics have led nowhere, and that this lack of progress is itself a symptom of the structural depth of the ills. Third, there should be, at least ideally, some higher charter, convention or edict the wrongdoers have flouted and violated and that the activists can refer to. Thanks to three decades of institutionalised ogorrhoea, there are no scarcities here: from the UNFCCC to the Paris Agreement, not to speak of the ceremoniously promulgated national pledges and plans (at least in Europe), whole libraries� worth of covenants and consensuses have been assembled for climate activists to pursue the felons with. But Smith concedes that all three criteria need not be fully satisfied. �The severity or urgency of the harm� may be such that direct action needs no further warrant.

There is nothing madly aberrant about this radicalism; rather, the literature is replete with similar deductions. Nor is Smith alone in claiming that the right to resistance at some point can morph into a duty. In fact, once the gravity of the climate crisis is duly recognised, it is difficult to see what ethical precepts could be marshalled to keep that morphing at bay and uphold a ban on destroying the causative property. To date, no case has been made for the precedence of the physical integrity of CO2-emitting devices.

-

What of terrorism? We have seen Lanchester speculate about a scenario where people scratch SUVs with their keys and subsume it under that term. Is that appropriate? Few other concepts are as loaded with ideology or coloured by a particular moment; �violence� has a history as old as the mists of time, but �terrorism� can now hardly be uttered without the likes of Donalds Rumsfeld and Trump ventriloquising. Less reason, then, to make concessions to ordinary usage. If terrorism is to have any analytical substance, its core definition must be the deliberately indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians for the purpose of instilling terror or something very nearly like it. We have rejected the claim of Jessica Reznicek and Ruby Montoya to be nonviolent � should we also label them terrorists? On this definition, it would be risible.

In just war theory, the differentia specifica of terrorism, the particular moral transgression that blackens its name, is the failure to discriminate between combatants and non-combatants when killing people. Reznicek and Montoya didn�t kill combatants. They killed no one, injured nobody, touched not a hair on anyone�s head, and so they must be placed at the farthest remove from the category of terrorism. Someone who would brand them terrorists would in all likelihood refuse to extend the term to people who invest or indulge in CO2-emitting devices, thus recommending that acts that wound no living beings be deemed terrorism and acts that actually, certifiably kill people be absolved. Such conceptual abuse from the guardians of business-as-usual would not be in the slightest surprising. Indeed it seems to have already begun, in anticipation of the onset of property destruction at scale: in 2019, the Danish and Swedish intelligence services and their academic mouthpieces warned that �climate terrorism is on the horizon�, in the words of Magnus Ranstorp, ideological hitman of the repressive state apparatus in Sweden, who had never before spilled a public word on the climate question and did not, of course, refer to the combustion of fossil fuels. He and his fellows had acts like Reznicek�s and Montoya�s on their radar. �One can easily imagine�, one Danish expert opined on the activists of the third cycle, �that they become frustrated with a political system that does not in their eyes take this matter seriously enough, and a small portion of them might resort to violent actions�, this hypothetical scenario being sketched in May 2019. Behold the paradox.

This is obviously not to suggest that CO2 emissions should be categorised as acts of terrorism, which would also constitute conceptual abuse, although arguably of a lesser sort, insofar as blind killing is central to what terrorism is. The term should not be devaluated, the crime not trivialised. Someone who enters a mosque with the intention to kill the maximum number of worshippers is undertaking an act of terrorism; someone who drills a hole in a pipeline or sets a depot aflame performs �a categorically distinct act�, in the words of Steve Vanderheiden, leading philosopher of environmental ethics. One could retort that the latter also seeks to create an atmosphere of fear. Is not the idea here to terrorise capitalists into submission? But the establishment of a deterrence cannot be a sufficient condition for terrorism. It is common knowledge that the prison system exists to deter citizens from infractions of the law, by threatening to abolish their freedom of movement; closed-circuit TV cameras, armed guards and a panoply of other fully normalised phenomena have similar functions. Parents have told lurid tales, raised their voice, even smacked their children to inculcate fear for unwholesome things. All of this might be objected to; none of it can be called terrorism. The unique objective of the mosque killer is to create an atmosphere where Muslims fear for their lives and go to Friday prayer in the knowledge that they could be killed at any moment just because of who they are. Fear for the loss of property is a categorically distinct fear. It pertains to the balance sheet and budget, not the body.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 20:18

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

it�s funny that the book has been discussed in the New York time, New Republic, Vox, etc but the same insane people who claim BP is helping save the climate are going to try and ban discussion of that book.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 20:26

Rime: Nov 2, 2011; by Games Forum

Trabisnikof posted:

it’s funny that the book has been discussed in the New York time, New Republic, Vox, etc but the same insane people who claim BP is helping save the climate are going to try and ban discussion of that book.

Hopefully the events of today are causing the remaining thread regulars to pause and reflect on the circumstances behind my D&D ban in a new light, LOL. :downs:

# ? Oct 6, 2021 20:33

Epitope: Nov 27, 2006; Grimey Drawer

RIP Syndrome posted:

The shark's doing good work

Came here to compliment it, well done

# ? Oct 6, 2021 20:46

Hubbert: Mar 25, 2007; At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

guys can someone just tell me which app i can put on my phone to solve this climate change thing already

# ? Oct 6, 2021 20:58

Conspiratiorist: Nov 12, 2015; 17th Separate Kryvyi Rih Tank Brigade named after Konstantin Pestushko
Look to my coming on the first light of the ~~fifth~~ ~~sixth~~ some day

Rime posted:

Hopefully the events of today are causing the remaining thread regulars to pause and reflect on the circumstances behind my D&D ban in a new light, LOL.

What's happening today?

# ? Oct 6, 2021 21:01

Iron Crowned: May 6, 2003; by Hand Knit

Hubbert posted:

guys can someone just tell me which app i can put on my phone to solve this climate change thing already

It's called Awful.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 21:02

Rectal Death Adept: Jun 20, 2018; by Fluffdaddy

solving climate change is as easy as telling yourself you are solving climate change and convincing yourself it's true and possible so no apps are necessary

# ? Oct 6, 2021 21:02

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Hubbert posted:

guys can someone just tell me which app i can put on my phone to solve this climate change thing already

well based on the list, looks like ecologi is the cheapest, starting at $10.50 a month!

https://ecologi.com/

and you help employ people in the 3rd world planting trees!

# ? Oct 6, 2021 21:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 12:24

Cromulent_Chill: Apr 6, 2009

Trabisnikof posted:

well based on the list, looks like ecologi is the cheapest, starting at $10.50 a month!

https://ecologi.com/

and you help employ people in the 3rd world planting trees!

Grifters are going to make so much money on ignorantly hopefull rubes with this poo poo.

# ? Oct 6, 2021 21:09

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > [Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

«‹›1934 »