5 ms·

the rise in planted hectares comes from a rise in prices and ever more stringent production quotas on other produce from Europe.

Udik 7y ago
There's an avocado craze since years, and EU agricultural regulations determine how convenient is to cultivate something. But hey, "climate change". So much more interesting. Pet peeve of mine: "climate wars". Sometimes we (the West) have been arming and training rebel factions for years, or destabilised governments, or paid the corrupt ones to serve our interests. And if a war breaks out, hey, "it's climate change!"
- benj111 7y ago
  While I don't disagree, climate change is relatively new, so to point to the Arab spring and the effect climate change potentially had on it is newsworthy, and deserves it's own treatment.
  - Udik 7y ago
    With all our meddling in the Middle East, I find it immoral to suggest that climate change might have a role in unrests and armed conflicts. It's a very easy scapegoat that absolves us from a tough questioning of our actions and purposes in the area. There are so many and so more obvious, or plausible, political factors entirely dependent from our will that to suggest it might be climate change's fault sounds like a bad joke.
    - benj111 7y ago
      The link as I understand it is climate change causing crop failures and push up the price of food. That sounds plausible. No conflict has a single cause, just a bunch of factors. It isn't about scapegoating, if you don't understand the cause how can you fix it. And it's not about morality either. Finding the causes of something is an amoral process. What you choose to do with that information can be informed by morality though.
      - Udik 7y ago
        > climate change causing crop failures and push up the price of food. That sounds plausible. It has to be verified for each case. In the case of the Syrian civil conflict, many aren't convinced: https://theconversation.com/is-syria-really-a-climate-war-we-examined-the-links-between-drought-migration-and-conflict-80110 https://theconversation.com/is-syria-really-a-climate-war-we... But more in general, climate might act as a multiplier of existing weaknesses. A drought or a crop failure (and other climate related disasters such as floods) is something a healthy country can withstand without much trouble. A poor country, with bad infrastructures and planning, is going to be affected much more. But it's an astoundingly silly idea that of improving the situation by fixing the droughts- but leaving those countries as vulnerable and politically unstable as ever- as opposed to helping countries to become more politically stable, wealthy, with better planning and infrastructure. A few years ago a WHO report calculated in many hundreds of thousands the yearly victims of climate change. Digging in the report, it turned out that the number was calculated as such: diarrhoea statistically kills x% more people per year per each added degree in average temperatures- but only in very poor countries, where sanitation and public health systems are severely lacking. It follows that by fixing sanitation and health care in those countries, at a relatively modest expense, we could save many millions, climate change or not.
        benj111 7y ago
        "It has to be verified for each case. In the case of the Syrian civil conflict, many aren't convinced" Yeah fine, that's a debate to be had, it shouldn't be coloured by morality though. "But more in general, climate might act as a multiplier" That's a fair point. I think at some point they do have to take responsibility. I'm reminded of the rhyme 'for want of a nail' [1]. You can't ignore climate change any more than you can blame it all on the nail [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail
        Udik 7y ago
        > Yeah fine, that's a debate to be had, it shouldn't be coloured by morality though. Do you think? In the case of Syria, for example, we're talking about 500 thousand deaths, millions displaced, a country in ruins. It's a disaster of gigantic proportions. And we made so many wrong choices before and during the conflict (first and foremost those of invading two neighbouring countries seeding chaos and fanaticism, then of siding against the regime at all costs, arming the rebels and prolonging the war) that could have made an enormous difference. But no, we wonder if it was the climate- the most indirect of all our possible responsibilities. Sometimes I feel we're some sort of street hooligans à la Clockwork Orange beating up homeless people in the streets, and then seriously wondering if it's the fault of capitalism.

Udik 7y ago

There's an avocado craze since years, and EU agricultural regulations determine how convenient is to cultivate something. But hey, "climate change". So much more interesting. Pet peeve of mine: "climate wars". Sometimes we (the West) have been arming and training rebel factions for years, or destabilised governments, or paid the corrupt ones to serve our interests. And if a war breaks out, hey, "it's climate change!"

benj111 7y ago
While I don't disagree, climate change is relatively new, so to point to the Arab spring and the effect climate change potentially had on it is newsworthy, and deserves it's own treatment.
- Udik 7y ago
  With all our meddling in the Middle East, I find it immoral to suggest that climate change might have a role in unrests and armed conflicts. It's a very easy scapegoat that absolves us from a tough questioning of our actions and purposes in the area. There are so many and so more obvious, or plausible, political factors entirely dependent from our will that to suggest it might be climate change's fault sounds like a bad joke.
  - benj111 7y ago
    The link as I understand it is climate change causing crop failures and push up the price of food. That sounds plausible. No conflict has a single cause, just a bunch of factors. It isn't about scapegoating, if you don't understand the cause how can you fix it. And it's not about morality either. Finding the causes of something is an amoral process. What you choose to do with that information can be informed by morality though.
    - Udik 7y ago
      > climate change causing crop failures and push up the price of food. That sounds plausible. It has to be verified for each case. In the case of the Syrian civil conflict, many aren't convinced: https://theconversation.com/is-syria-really-a-climate-war-we-examined-the-links-between-drought-migration-and-conflict-80110 https://theconversation.com/is-syria-really-a-climate-war-we... But more in general, climate might act as a multiplier of existing weaknesses. A drought or a crop failure (and other climate related disasters such as floods) is something a healthy country can withstand without much trouble. A poor country, with bad infrastructures and planning, is going to be affected much more. But it's an astoundingly silly idea that of improving the situation by fixing the droughts- but leaving those countries as vulnerable and politically unstable as ever- as opposed to helping countries to become more politically stable, wealthy, with better planning and infrastructure. A few years ago a WHO report calculated in many hundreds of thousands the yearly victims of climate change. Digging in the report, it turned out that the number was calculated as such: diarrhoea statistically kills x% more people per year per each added degree in average temperatures- but only in very poor countries, where sanitation and public health systems are severely lacking. It follows that by fixing sanitation and health care in those countries, at a relatively modest expense, we could save many millions, climate change or not.
      - benj111 7y ago
        "It has to be verified for each case. In the case of the Syrian civil conflict, many aren't convinced" Yeah fine, that's a debate to be had, it shouldn't be coloured by morality though. "But more in general, climate might act as a multiplier" That's a fair point. I think at some point they do have to take responsibility. I'm reminded of the rhyme 'for want of a nail' [1]. You can't ignore climate change any more than you can blame it all on the nail [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Want_of_a_Nail
        Udik 7y ago
        > Yeah fine, that's a debate to be had, it shouldn't be coloured by morality though. Do you think? In the case of Syria, for example, we're talking about 500 thousand deaths, millions displaced, a country in ruins. It's a disaster of gigantic proportions. And we made so many wrong choices before and during the conflict (first and foremost those of invading two neighbouring countries seeding chaos and fanaticism, then of siding against the regime at all costs, arming the rebels and prolonging the war) that could have made an enormous difference. But no, we wonder if it was the climate- the most indirect of all our possible responsibilities. Sometimes I feel we're some sort of street hooligans à la Clockwork Orange beating up homeless people in the streets, and then seriously wondering if it's the fault of capitalism.