6 ms·

Having been an expat traveled to over 25 countries, I can confidently say our natural world is fucked. Modern industrialism has given the third world too much m

by tozeur 7y ago

Having been an expat traveled to over 25 countries, I can confidently say our natural world is fucked. Modern industrialism has given the third world too much manufacturing power. And they aren’t aware of the consequences and don’t care, because “fuckit I want kids toys and double ply toilet paper for my family too, not just the Westerners”

BurningFrog 7y ago
All currently rich "sophisticated" countries were in a similar phase when they were fighting their way out of poverty. Once countries get rich enough, they can afford to care about the environment. China seems to advance much faster than others did historically, so I'm hopeful.
- whiddershins 7y ago
  We also assumed as countries became more rich/industrialized/advanced they would become more democratic, and more concerned with human rights, and less zero-sum adversarial in dealing with the United States. I think those hopes are no longer mainstream thinking in regards to China. How confident should we be about the prediction that China will adopt similar policies to the US in regards to the things you are mentioning?
  - BurningFrog 7y ago
    China has definitely become much better on human rights. It's not often mentioned in polite company, but the Chinese communist government killed ~65 million of its own citizens under Mao. I don't want to downplay the current regime's many and serious human rights violations, but they are thankfully on a much more modest level. Internationally, China has focused strongly on peaceful trade, not military confrontation.
    - Joakal 7y ago
      They didn't kill them. They went through a government change, a revolution where they were experienced in fighting, not farming. The alternative was living under the old government that they hated. It's like in Zimbabwe, they kicked out the white farmers and suddenly they're no longer the bread state.
      - BurningFrog 7y ago
        You're saying the deaths were from incompetence in ruling, not deliberate murders. There was plenty of that, but it's not the dominant factor: https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedong-mass-murder https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedo...
  - _AzMoo 7y ago
    We should be quite confident because there are signs they're already adopting environmentalist policies. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/apr/25/china-environment-law-fines-for-pollution https://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/a...
  - Joakal 7y ago
    USA democratic system is one step away from China's one party system: it's a two party system in USA which hasn't changed much for centuries. Europe, Australia, etc, have more than two parties in government. More choice, more representation.
    - seagullz 7y ago
      “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” ― Gore Vidal
- A2017U1 7y ago
  All the rich countries consume a few Earth's worth of resources per person though, while visible things like plastic pollution and environmental regulations are generally solved, other issues like emissions are at unsustainable levels if everyone on Earth lived at the consumption level of the first world. It's a very real contradiction the West has to face in the next few decades as these places modernize.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  But someone in the first world does have a much larger ecological footprint compared to people in developing countries. So the problem isn't solved at all.
- tozeur 7y ago
  I completely agree. We just happened to do it first.
roboys 7y ago
I don't blame them, we in the developed countries have a duty to develop cost efficient carbon neutral growth strategies for our/their future... We would be hypocrites if we tried to suppress their development after we've had our turn on the ride.
mschuster91 7y ago
Where's the problem with toilet paper? That stuff degrades really really fast even if simply dumped somewhere.
- singularity2001 7y ago
  IDK, you have to clear the whole Amazon if 7bio people want toilet paper?
  - Fjolsvith 7y ago
    Don't count me in - I've already stored up 4 decades of tp.

by tozeur 7y ago

BurningFrog 7y ago

All currently rich "sophisticated" countries were in a similar phase when they were fighting their way out of poverty. Once countries get rich enough, they can afford to care about the environment. China seems to advance much faster than others did historically, so I'm hopeful.

whiddershins 7y ago
We also assumed as countries became more rich/industrialized/advanced they would become more democratic, and more concerned with human rights, and less zero-sum adversarial in dealing with the United States. I think those hopes are no longer mainstream thinking in regards to China. How confident should we be about the prediction that China will adopt similar policies to the US in regards to the things you are mentioning?
- BurningFrog 7y ago
  China has definitely become much better on human rights. It's not often mentioned in polite company, but the Chinese communist government killed ~65 million of its own citizens under Mao. I don't want to downplay the current regime's many and serious human rights violations, but they are thankfully on a much more modest level. Internationally, China has focused strongly on peaceful trade, not military confrontation.
  - Joakal 7y ago
    They didn't kill them. They went through a government change, a revolution where they were experienced in fighting, not farming. The alternative was living under the old government that they hated. It's like in Zimbabwe, they kicked out the white farmers and suddenly they're no longer the bread state.
    - BurningFrog 7y ago
      You're saying the deaths were from incompetence in ruling, not deliberate murders. There was plenty of that, but it's not the dominant factor: https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedong-mass-murder https://www.heritage.org/asia/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedo...
- _AzMoo 7y ago
  We should be quite confident because there are signs they're already adopting environmentalist policies. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/apr/25/china-environment-law-fines-for-pollution https://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/a...
- Joakal 7y ago
  USA democratic system is one step away from China's one party system: it's a two party system in USA which hasn't changed much for centuries. Europe, Australia, etc, have more than two parties in government. More choice, more representation.
  - seagullz 7y ago
    “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” ― Gore Vidal
A2017U1 7y ago
All the rich countries consume a few Earth's worth of resources per person though, while visible things like plastic pollution and environmental regulations are generally solved, other issues like emissions are at unsustainable levels if everyone on Earth lived at the consumption level of the first world. It's a very real contradiction the West has to face in the next few decades as these places modernize.
raxxorrax 7y ago
But someone in the first world does have a much larger ecological footprint compared to people in developing countries. So the problem isn't solved at all.
tozeur 7y ago
I completely agree. We just happened to do it first.

roboys 7y ago

I don't blame them, we in the developed countries have a duty to develop cost efficient carbon neutral growth strategies for our/their future... We would be hypocrites if we tried to suppress their development after we've had our turn on the ride.

mschuster91 7y ago

Where's the problem with toilet paper? That stuff degrades really really fast even if simply dumped somewhere.

singularity2001 7y ago
IDK, you have to clear the whole Amazon if 7bio people want toilet paper?
- Fjolsvith 7y ago
  Don't count me in - I've already stored up 4 decades of tp.