5 ms·
Harvey was a hurricane. It could have occurred anywhere on the Gulf Coast. There is no direct relationship between climate change and any particular named storm
by ackfoo 9y ago
Harvey was a hurricane. It could have occurred anywhere on the Gulf Coast. There is no direct relationship between climate change and any particular named storm.
To argue otherwise is to destroy one's credibility.
The problems that exacerbated the disaster of Harvey are indeed linked to climate change, but not in the simple-minded way that Naomi Klein makes out. The economic factors that lead to high-density construction in flood zones are the same as those that drive the wasteful use of fossil fuel energy. Overpopulation, overbuilding, market-driven urban planning practices, shoddy construction intended to maximize profit and waste while minimizing safety--all of these underlie both climate change and the disaster in Houston.
Raving about climate change as if every hurricane is a direct consequence is both intellectually ridiculous and it ignores the root cause: us and our wasteful, idiotic consumerism. If we understand that we, and not corporations or governments, are the root cause, we can fix climate change almost overnight by two simple expedients: stop having babies and stop buying things that we don't absolutely need.
By doing so, we could exercise power over the corporations that we unfairly demonize. No company is going to dig oil out of the ground if the demand does not justify it.
Klain's worst offence is being a stupid liberal, just like the ones who drove 36 hours or more one-way to join the protest at Standing Rock in gas-powered vehicles. Want to stop an oil pipeline? Stop using oil. It's easy: at least 80% of our energy use is wasted. Just cut the waste.
When stupid liberals write articles like this, a backlash is inevitable. Want four more years of Trump? Want the alt-right marching in the streets? Keep writing articles like this.
Instead, be a smart liberal. Start by having a look in the mirror.
- toss892625 9y ago'market-driven urban planning practices' National Flood Insurance Program subsidizes building in flood-prone areas. Doesn't sound very market-driven to me.
- danharaj 9y agoNo true market.
- honestoHeminway 9y agoIf its bad, it never is.
- danharaj 9y agoA market is a market, whether it's distorted or regulated or monopolized or captured or unhealthy. The fact that markets can behave poorly because they are embedded in the wider world is absolutely intrinsic to the concept of a market.
- emodendroket 9y agoYeah, I think it is a mistake to try and think about the market and the political environment as two separate spheres rather than deeply linked entities constantly influencing each other. There is no such thing as "free market" without a government creating the conditions for one, whether that means subsidizing flood insurance or creating a navy to force other countries to go along with free trade (a development largely coinciding with the rise of laissez-faire theory).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- DennisP 9y agoNot all cases of lung cancer are caused by smoking. There's no way to prove that a particular case of lung cancer was caused by smoking. Does that mean we shouldn't talk about lung cancer as a reason to avoid smoking?
- mannykannot 9y agoNevertheless, now is the time to talk about climate change, and has been for some time.
- mcot2 9y agoI'm more interested in sea level rise and warmer oceans as direct catalysts for more powerful storms with larger impacts occurring more frequently. The fact that we indiscriminately build cities and industries close to the coast obviously doesn't help.
- siculars 9y agoYes, overall, if you care that deeply about climate change you should not procreate - you may also consider an early exit for yourself. Then there is the eco-terrorist who will justify early exists for others by saving the planet. If you think those that supported Trump were bad now, just wait till "stupid liberals" start telling people who can and can not have babies. Good luck. Obviously, the above is ridiculous.
- DarkKomunalec 9y ago> stop having babies Most of the west has already drastically reduced the number of babies. All that happened is we were told we need immigration instead.
- mercurysmessage 9y agoI don't know why you insist on spreading this ignorance all over HN, this really isn't the place for your rhetoric.
- DarkKomunalec 9y agoIgnorance? Well, please point out where I made an error - I'd be happy to correct it.
- mercurysmessage 9y ago> All that happened is we were told we need immigration instead. You say this everywhere, we discussed this already. You have an unfounded, ignorant view of immigration. You are so locked into your position that it doesn't matter what you are shown, you will ignore it and instead fall back to your ignorant position. And please, tell me why a tech news aggregator is the place for ignorant anti-immigration rhetoric?
- DarkKomunalec 9y agoSo the error is... where? If you think I am beyond saving, at least point it out for the sake of any not-yet-lost souls reading.
- mercurysmessage 9y agoWhat is wrong with immigration? What do you have against people looking to move to new countries. When someone moves, they pay taxes, they work, they contribute to society. It's not easy to immigrate, and often smarter, better educated people are the ones who get to immigrate. It's a benefit for the country that gets a lot of immigrants (i.e. The US benefits from this a lot), and a detriment to the country that loses them. Often called brain drain. Employers can choose who to hire, a smart employer won't care if the candidate is born in the same country as you, it has absolutely no bearing on their quality as a human, or the work they complete. If you live in North America, aside from the aboriginals, everyone is descended from, or directly an immigrant. What makes you so much better than someone else looking to move? Again, a tech news aggregator is not a place for ignorant opinions on, frankly, humans. You also haven't answered why you feel this way.
- emodendroket 9y agoI completely disagree with this perspective. If I did the most carbon-neutral thing and jumped off a building tomorrow it still would not make a difference. And it has really grown wearisome to read "this is why Trump won!!" in response to literally any other perspective or action.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- sctb 9y agoWe're trying to have a thoughtful conversation here. Name calling, handwavey dismissals, and provocation just start flamewars. Please aim for a higher standard so we can have a better chance at a substantive discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jabv 9y agoI appreciate your call to take a cause seriously by making changes in one's personal life. That said, every time I read someone advise "stop having babies" to combat climate change, I am reminded of the South Park episode wherein the overzealous hunters claim that deer overpopulation will cause some deer to die, so they need to kill the deer to prevent overpopulation and future deer deaths.