• 0 Posts
  • 360 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle





  • I’m not going to watch a whole youtube video just to pick up on the latest lingo.

    Deny it’s happening, then claim we can’t change anything once it’s happened. The moment where we could do something about it is skipped over.

    Like you are doing now.

    No, mitigation does not require “drastic” action, fortunately. We’ve significantly mitigated it already, concerning our own emissions, and can do so further.

    What world do you live on? Certainly not the one the rest of us do. Our emissions have only been increasing.

    Yes we require drastic action. In fact we required drastic action decades ago. Now we require radical action.

    Do you have an idea that might mitigate it overseas, or change domestic politics enough to speed things up here?

    First and foremost, stop pointing your finger overseas. It is nothing but a distraction, a convenient excuse to not do what needs to be done domestically because “oh but China and India”.

    Secondly, investment in equipping developing nations with clean energy infrastructure can help.

    I don’t think nonviolent protest is going to do it, there’s not enough of us willing to do so.

    Ultimately it is going to have to come down to protest.

    I am hoping non-violent methods, such as general strikes and direct action will be enough.

    But that does require solidarity, motivation, and mutual aid.





  • In my opinion, this position requires some cherry picking to avoid evidence of times when different things have improved over the past few decades.

    Quite the opposite. The times when we have made improvements have come precisely because we have made the sorts of decisive changes that we needed to make, that we are currently pretending are impossible.

    We actually solved the issue with the ozone layer, precisely because we took action and passed regulation banning their usage, despite the objections of businesses.

    Same thing with leaded petrol. We took decisive action and addressed the problem at a systemic level, rather than just softly appealing for people to make the “right choice uwu”.

    In our current unprecedented circumstances, drastic change on a short timescale is going to require one of two things: the suspension of our democracy, or wide-scale bloodshed. Neither of these is actually particularly likely to result in positive change either.

    I agree that unrest seems basically inevitable. Because the people with the power to make the changes required have shown us in no uncertain terms that they never make the changes required.

    So I’m not sure why continuing to pander to those delusions with half-measures is preferable.

    I’m hoping change can be accomplished through general strikes and direct action. So that widespread bloodshed can be avoided.

    The problem is there may not be survival at the end of this tunnel. But only one way might work in time, and that’s the one we’ve been using for a couple centuries and seen okayish results with.

    Oh. So you are completely insane. Because we absolutely have not been seeing okayish results.










  • The idea that your create your world with unfettered freedom and no restrictions is a false notion.

    Good thing I didn’t say that then.

    But I’m saying you also have to be realistic and face the fact that no one is going to pay you to sit on your bum and play video games all day (in all likelihood).

    Who said anything about that?

    The world you want to live in is bounded by the stark facts of economic necessities and social pressures.

    Except economics is not “facts”, it’s a way of organising that we have the power to change. Specifically referring to economics, the world is the way that it is because some people want it to be this way, it is not a fact of nature.