|
A big flaming stink posted:This will do nothing to avert the coming climate catastrophe. We simply do not have the time for incrementalism, and the climate does not give a drat about what is politically possible. So we're basically doomed unless we somehow get enlightened dictatorships installed all around the world.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:So we're basically doomed unless we somehow get enlightened dictatorships installed all around the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:37
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Pretty sure he was being facetious. I'm not being facetious at all. It's a huge win and a huge first step. I really don't understand why people poo-poo and dismiss enormous action that does not solve *the entire climate crisis* in one fell swoop. Clearly the only way that something as expansive and all encompassing as climate change will ever be "solved" (clearly there's a whole bunch of definitions of "solved") is via a thousand "small" actions taken by every nation on Earth over decades and decades of time. A big flaming stink posted:This will do nothing to avert the coming climate catastrophe. We simply do not have the time for incrementalism, and the climate does not give a drat about what is politically possible. OK? Passing the IRA is a very good thing and a very big step and also it does not "avert the coming climate catastrophe" on its own. Please point out the climate activists and youth activists who are saying "now that the IRA has passed we have averted climate catastrophe and don't need to do any more work. congratulations, we did it, we beat climate change." I truly don't understand this attitude.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
I think the attitude is well explained by cat botherers' post just above yours. If ending capitalism is necessary to keep the damages below a "billions dead with climate" level, celebrating actions taken within a capitalist framework is at best a distraction. Most of the disagreement is probably around the definition of solved, which as you noted can vary wildly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:28
|
|
|
Another thing necessary to keep climate deaths low is for the world to go vegan
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:I think the attitude is well explained by cat botherers' post just above yours. If ending capitalism is necessary to keep the damages below a "billions dead with climate" level, celebrating actions taken within a capitalist framework is at best a distraction. Most of the disagreement is probably around the definition of solved, which as you noted can vary wildly. In addition to the capitalist (or maybe as a subcategory of it) with the way our government works and how the democrats work, we probably won’t get another substantial climate change bill for another decade.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:In addition to the capitalist (or maybe as a subcategory of it) with the way our government works and how the democrats work, we probably won’t get another substantial climate change bill for another decade. Most likely Republicans will retake power and regulatory capture destroy everything. Not even counting the Democrats who are already regulatory captured: https://i.imgur.com/9stmuxD.mp4
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
I find it fatiguing the people who have climbed onto the climate emergency as a way to push their own barrow for what they would do if they were the benign dictator in charge of the world. yes, you would like it if you were the one in charge and you would nationalise/take ownership/destroy/sell (depending on which barrow it is) all the farms and people's labor to your wonderful wisdom and your promise is that you and only you can solve this emergency. Obviously it could be that you don't literally mean you, just as long as the person that it is, does it exactly the way you want will be fine too. Is this really helping more than Biden signing the IRA? At least he seems to be trying to piss with the dick he has got.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:05
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:I think the attitude is well explained by cat botherers' post just above yours. If ending capitalism is necessary to keep the damages below a "billions dead with climate" level, celebrating actions taken within a capitalist framework is at best a distraction. Most of the disagreement is probably around the definition of solved, which as you noted can vary wildly. I'd be curious what you or that poster would say it is a distraction from, then. A distraction from a burgeoning global revolutionary communist / socialist movement to overthrow liberal democracy (per that poster's declaration that liberal democracy must go) and institute ... something that will implement a "meaningful solution" (again, that poster's word, could really use a definition of what they mean by "meaningful solution")? I'm all for leveling inequality and building more just societies. I'm very doubtful that climate action taken under our current political systems is distracting the work of global anti-capitalist revolution in any sort of meaningful way, or any way at all, honestly. If the proposed calculation is: "acknowledging or celebrating climate action taken today under capitalist liberal democracies is bad because it distracts from the work needed to tear down capitalist liberal democracies so we can replace them with [system] which will allow us to achieve meaningful solutions" then I would ask: - what work, exactly, is in danger of being overshadowed and distracted from by climate action under capitalist liberal democracy? - how does "celebrating actions taken" actually harm that work, if it exists? Is there some polling data that shows that people around the world become less interested in abandoning capitalist liberal democracy if those systems of government succeed in taking steps to address climate action? - assuming that there is a movement that is being overshadowed and distracted from, is there a concrete or quantifiable framework that attempts to prove how abandoning immediate climate action today under capitalist liberal democracy in pursuit of wholescale global systems change actually does result in better outcomes, as opposed to pursuing both climate action within the current systems today while at the same time pursuing global systems change? Like, I'd like to know, roughly, the timeline for how long we need to abandon pursuing action under our current system in order to achieve the global revolution that will allow for "meaningful solutions". Will it take about 10 years to achieve tearing down capitalist liberal democracy so that we can then pursue true climate solutions? 20 years? - it would be helpful, probably, for folks to define what they mean when they say "meaningful solutions" or "solved" in regards to climate action. For me, personally, "meaningful solutions" are concrete actions taken to decarbonize economies and continue our transition from O&G to clean energy. China's enormous buildout of solar and wind is part of a meaningful solution. Passing the IRA to turbo-charge American clean energy buildout and production is part of a meaningful solution, etc. As to "solved", well, I don't really have any thoughts about "solved." The climate crisis will continue for my life and after I'm long dead. I consider every action we can take today to be steps towards "solving" climate change hundreds of years and many generations from now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:I find it fatiguing the people who have climbed onto the climate emergency as a way to push their own barrow for what they would do if they were the benign dictator in charge of the world. Okay I have no idea where you are getting the vibe that leftists imagine themselves as an enlightened despot. Even if you don't count the anarchists, leftism has always been about solidarity and organizing together. A trivial materialist analysis of the tendencies of The capitalist modes of production make it obvious that the extreme change necessary to avert the death of billions simply will not come about in such a mode.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:26
|
|
|
How are u posted:I'd be curious what you or that poster would say it is a distraction from, then. A distraction from a burgeoning global revolutionary communist / socialist movement to overthrow liberal democracy (per that poster's declaration that liberal democracy must go) and institute ... something that will implement a "meaningful solution" (again, that poster's word, could really use a definition of what they mean by "meaningful solution")? So for me I'd have to say that the thing that really rankles me about seeing action like the ira trumpeted as meaningful progress is one of selfishness. Specifically even if the goals of the Paris Accord are met, the global south Will still suffer profound catastrophes from the worsening conditions of the climate, and I don't think even you can meaningfully expect the industrialized nations to bail them out. So in effect, the celebration of this policy is gently caress you, got mine writ large.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:31
|
|
|
https://www.su.se/english/news/it-s-raining-pfas-even-in-antarctica-and-on-the-tibetan-plateau-rainwater-is-unsafe-to-drink-1.620735 Apparently rainwater is unsafe to drink now due to the presence of PFAS chemicals even in remote areas
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/trailclimate/status/1559956159322238976?s=21
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Okay I have no idea where you are getting the vibe that leftists imagine themselves as an enlightened despot. Even if you don't count the anarchists, leftism has always been about solidarity and organizing together. A trivial materialist analysis of the tendencies of The capitalist modes of production make it obvious that the extreme change necessary to avert the death of billions simply will not come about in such a mode. Pol Pot was an enlightened leftist. He truly believed he was throwing off the yoke of the capitalist class and their over educated enablers (by killing all of those educated enablers that he could lay his hands upon). It did not help the climate emergency more than it harmed people. Anyway, it is not just leftists, there are plenty of conservatives that bemoan EU rules and say that it is because handouts exist keeping poors alive that would otherwise be dead and no longer harming the environment that is the problem (even the otherwise much loved Sir David Attenborough is of this thought). The world for the 7 billion people or so on earth is not going to be made better by world wide revolution of indeterminate outcome. China using state owned companies building lots of solar, nuclear and wind is helping. Continued development of smart phones is helping. The Uniting Church investment fund requiring demonstration of concrete action towards 50% reduction in carbon intensity by 2030 of any company it invests in is helping. The US voting out Trump and allowing a new administration to sign in new law to drive change in the US economy is helping. People using the climate emergency to say it's all because society is not arranged how they like it is not helping.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://www.su.se/english/news/it-s-raining-pfas-even-in-antarctica-and-on-the-tibetan-plateau-rainwater-is-unsafe-to-drink-1.620735 Good news, no need for teflon pans anymore! Antistick is already in the water!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://www.su.se/english/news/it-s-raining-pfas-even-in-antarctica-and-on-the-tibetan-plateau-rainwater-is-unsafe-to-drink-1.620735 I'd bet money that rain water has been unsafe for decades & they've only just noticed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 19:01
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So for me I'd have to say that the thing that really rankles me about seeing action like the ira trumpeted as meaningful progress is one of selfishness. Specifically even if the goals of the Paris Accord are met, the global south Will still suffer profound catastrophes from the worsening conditions of the climate, and I don't think even you can meaningfully expect the industrialized nations to bail them out. So in effect, the celebration of this policy is gently caress you, got mine writ large. Would it be fair to paraphrase this a saying that a key thing you’re worried about the IRA distracting from is the funding of efforts to mitigate the effects of climate-related disasters? That seems plausible, if so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
Trainee PornStar posted:I'd bet money that rain water has been unsafe for decades & they've only just noticed. Yeah, the limits were lowered recently. It's been hosed for decades. Thanks 3M and BASF et.al.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 23:21
|
|
|
Pardon my ignorance but is that strictly like, rainwater directly from the rain, or can it be filtered/treated/etc and made safe if captured?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://www.su.se/english/news/it-s-raining-pfas-even-in-antarctica-and-on-the-tibetan-plateau-rainwater-is-unsafe-to-drink-1.620735 Pretty sure tap water has PFOA/PFAS in it as well in addition to microplastics. They could kidnap and blood test the North Sentinelese and I'm sure they'd have it in their blood and tissues as well. That island isn't as remote as you'd think, evidently you can see it on climb-out from a nearby airport that services jets up to 737 size.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:Pol Pot was an enlightened leftist. He truly believed he was throwing off the yoke of the capitalist class and their over educated enablers (by killing all of those educated enablers that he could lay his hands upon). It did not help the climate emergency more than it harmed people. Lol, yeah things could be worse and we can't risk what we've built and do you have a better plan (oh no that would be too disruptive and difficult). To this radical environmentalist leftist, it sounds like arguments from where you're at are "preserving our way of life/peace and prosperity is worth the unimaginable cost to the global poor right loving now, and pretty much everybody that will exist after this for lifetimes". Well I say it's not, and I'd literally prefer we all of us bear the cost of change together now (rather than just the most marginalized and poor who already do) even if it means disruption and violence. In fact it certainly does and that cost climbs the longer we put off real change. Not to mention the track record of the powers that be (that almost fully control human development at this point) when it comes to recognizing and acting on climate change. Am I not helping? Sounds like that's a good thing for you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
smug n stuff posted:Would it be fair to paraphrase this a saying that a qkey thing you’re worried about the IRA distracting from is the funding of efforts to mitigate the effects of climate-related disasters? That seems plausible, if so. Not quite, my concern is that satisfaction with the IRA, and consequently the Paris accords, shows a complete disregard for the global south. The complete success of the Paris Accord will not avert a rise in temperature that will, unquestionably, subject the global South to unimaginable deprivation. Complete and utter destruction of their ways of life deprivations. So someone is happy with progress towards that goal, all that tells me is they do not care at all about the fate of the dispossessed, either either out of ignorance or out of inhuman apathy A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Aug 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
BRJurgis posted:Lol, yeah things could be worse and we can't risk what we've built and do you have a better plan (oh no that would be too disruptive and difficult). What's the alternative plan that's better than the ones proposed?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Not quite, my concern is that satisfaction with the IRA, and consequently the Paris accords, shows a complete disregard for the global south. The complete success of the Paris Accord will not avert a rise in temperature that will, unquestionably, subject the global South to unimaginable deprivation. Complete and utter destruction of their ways of life deprivations. What's this global south that you speak of exactly? Are you referring to developing Countries?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
It's so weird that every time we make a new synthetic chemical it turns out it causes cancer because it has never existed before and our biology doesn't know how to handle it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 03:05
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:What's the alternative plan that's better than the ones proposed? You just have to end capitalism, bing bong so simple.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 03:14
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:What's this global south that you speak of exactly? Are you referring to developing Countries? Not quite. You can read more about this concept on the free encyclopedia, Wikipedia , which summarizes some of its differences and why it’s used: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_North_and_Global_South quote:The concept of Global North and Global South (or North–South divide in a global context) is used to describe a grouping of countries along socio-economic and political characteristics. The Global South is a term often used to identify regions within Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania. It is one of a family of terms, including "Third World" and "Periphery", that denote regions outside Europe and North America, most (though not all) of these countries are low-income and often politically or culturally marginalized on one side of the divide, the other side being the countries of the Global North (often equated with developed countries).[1] As such, the term does not inherently refer to a geographical south; for example, most of the Global South is geographically within the Northern Hemisphere.[1] Here is the source for [2], Mitlin, Diana; Satterthwaite, David (2013). Urban Poverty in the Global South: Scale and Nature. Routledge. p. 13. ISBN 9780415624664.  It is a fairly popular term. One day, it could eclipse “developing countries” in its popularity. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 03:17
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Not quite, my concern is that satisfaction with the IRA, and consequently the Paris accords, shows a complete disregard for the global south. The complete success of the Paris Accord will not avert a rise in temperature that will, unquestionably, subject the global South to unimaginable deprivation. Complete and utter destruction of their ways of life deprivations. There's nothing that will do that though. Climate Change has been ongoing for a century and the changes that are baked in will affect billions of people no matter what. No legislation or action we take will make that not true. We can make climate change less bad and that's it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:What's the alternative plan that's better than the ones proposed? I think anything impactful would require a large popular movement, but given the stakes and capture a certain urgency in attitude is required beyond donating or protesting. The threat of tearing this down is what it takes to exact concessions, and our misdirection and systemic damage and exploitation is unconscionable enough the actual collapse is not unearned. We should be leaders in sustainable change with the wealth and power we have, we can't afford not to be. That is not reflected nearly enough in our population nevermind our leaders/powers. Campaign flyer protest energy is not enough, the world is radically wrong. Unprecedented in scope of damage and impact. We have to be willing to give things up and fight, and it has go be a movement not individual consumer action. The situation warrants no less. That attitude is what is most important to me presently, but a labor/climate movement, "justice and sustainability" say, I think could be effective.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 04:37
|
|
|
I don't think there is any plausible "threat of tearing it down" though, which makes your plan just sound silly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 05:35
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So someone is happy with progress towards that goal, all that tells me is they do not care at all about the fate of the dispossessed, either either out of ignorance or out of inhuman apathy I assume you're talking about me? I very much disagree that climate progress today is somehow a betrayal of the 'global south'. Could you lay our your plan for global climate action that suits your criteria?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 05:36
|
|
|
It's very very very weird to put global south in scare quotes when talking about climate policy, seeing as it's the more-or-less recognized name for the G77, one of the major negotiating factions at UN climate councils since before Rio.  The UN posted:https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1127rioprinciples.pdf https://www.sei.org/publications/discourses-of-the-global-south/ https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1867&context=law_lawreview posted:There emerged at Rio some venom between North and South. In broad terms, the issue was whether the North was going to make available the technology and wealth transfers that were necessary for the South to conform to the new environmental standards, which they said the North was imposing on them. This disagreement led to some bitter exchanges. The divide between North and South seemed to intensify over the two years of the preparatory meetings. With the allegiances of the Cold War at an end, there was increased fluidity. The caucus of developing nations, known as the G-77, includes more than 125 coun-tries. They made heavy demands, which had begun in earnest at the earlier negotiations of the instruments relating to the ozone layer.7 4Sadly, these divisions were only papered over at Rio. No real resolu-tion was attempted and no strategy emerged for resolving the issues. The United States offered no real initiatives, and for the most part the rest of the developed world was prepared to hide behind the American position.Developed nations said, of course, that they did not agree with the United States but, in fact, the American position provided them with shelter. Creative policy development necessary to bridge the gap will have to await another day. &etc, just pulled a few top search results
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 06:21
|
|
|
Is anyone else just of the assumption that the world governments generally know and accept it's all going to go down, billions are going to die, and we can't fix it within the system or hope to change the system itself - so the actions they do take are with the goal of just persevering something, anything, with themselves still in some position of power? Sure, we're falling without a parachute or backup, but if we brace ourselves just right and aim at just the right angle and get real drat lucky, maybe we won't smash every single bone in our body, and maybe we'll rupture just one lung and maybe come out of this just quadriplegic instead of a sticky red stain on the ground?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 06:49
|
|
|
TheBlackVegetable posted:Is anyone else just of the assumption that the world governments generally know and accept it's all going to go down, billions are going to die, and we can't fix it within the system or hope to change the system itself - so the actions they do take are with the goal of just persevering something, anything, with themselves still in some position of power? Two systems have to achieve stability simultaneously. The climate and the world economy. There might not be a solution with a great deal of suffering. The authoritarian climate solution only gets the climate stable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 07:08
|
|
|
The economy is completely made up, it only exists as a shared delusion. Just declare it fixed and move on to solving real problems. "It is too expensive to do X" really means "some greedy fucker somewhere is holding progress hostage".
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 07:24
|
|
|
The individuals most responsible for killing the planet have kids and grandkids whose futures they obviously do not give a gently caress about. When the social contract is so irrevocably broken to the point where the wealthiest/most powerful families no longer care about their legacies, poo poo's hosed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 07:33
|
|
|
BRJurgis posted:Lol, yeah things could be worse and we can't risk what we've built and do you have a better plan (oh no that would be too disruptive and difficult). As someone that is part of reducing climate impact of the global south without loving over their lives with violence for their own good, I think you don't appreciate what tearing down all the systems actually means. Like a survivalist that thinks the post nuclear armageddon will include them as anything other than another corpse on the side of the road or in a tunnel, you and me both alongside anyone that knows about climate models will be put up against a wall and shot in a proper revolution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 09:44
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://www.su.se/english/news/it-s-raining-pfas-even-in-antarctica-and-on-the-tibetan-plateau-rainwater-is-unsafe-to-drink-1.620735 Well that's absolutely mortifying, and I'm not sure how I can continue today without breaking. Harrowing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 09:58
|
|
|
I declare some losses unavoidable, because if I call them acceptable it will look quite bad
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 11:59 on Aug 18, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 11:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:I declare some losses unavoidable, because if I call them acceptable it will look quite bad They don't have to be acceptable to be unavoidable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2022 12:44
|
|