4 ms·
That is a legitimate criticism of a lot of the environmental movement, but the viewpoint you’re describing is not from the mainstream of conservative thought.
by Brakenshire 7y ago
That is a legitimate criticism of a lot of the environmental movement, but the viewpoint you’re describing is not from the mainstream of conservative thought.
Conservatives are invited to put themselves at the heart of tackling climate change, by proposing policies which can reduce carbon emissions at a fast enough rate without overturning the economic system. I personally think that is the most credible way of tackling the issue.
But first they have to stop denying warming is happening, stop denying the pre-eminent role of greenhouse gases from human civilization, and then propose mechanisms which are credible to tackle the problem.
Such a position does exist in conservative movements, for instance you can see it in the British Conservative party, but it is unusual in the English-speaking world. Most English-speaking conservative leaders have reduced themselves to bringing snowballs into Parliament, or calling climate change a Chinese hoax.
- yodsanklai 7y ago> But first they have to stop denying warming is happening I believe that they can see that reducing carbon emissions is entirely incompatible with their usual line of thoughts and policies. They need either to renounce to their ideology, or deny/minimize climate change.
- ZeroGravitas 7y agoI don't think it's incompatible with their policies and principles, but it is incompatible with their current funding sources (coal, oil, Russia, Saudi) and voting base (old people who will die relatively soon soon). Competition from China and EU showing it's possible and profitable and voters dying out might flip them surprisingly quickly.
- rayiner 7y agoChina, which has recently added an entire United States worth of new coal emissions?
- ZeroGravitas 7y agoYes. China is big and growing fast. It also spent 3 times what the US did on renewables. It's coal plants are all more efficient than their US equivalensts too.
- triceratops 7y ago> Climate change isn't real > Even if it's real it's not due to humans > Even if it's due to humans, it'll cost too much to fix > To fix it cheaply we need nuclear power. Nothing else will do. But no one will allow that, so forget about it. > And really there's no point because China/India/Nigeria/Brazil > Countries at higher latitudes might actually be better off in a warmer world. Should we even do anything? Does that cover everything?