7 ms·

As long as global governments are comitted to consumer capitalism there is now doubt that for the richest countries energy abundance will not be a problem. The

As long as global governments are comitted to consumer capitalism there is now doubt that for the richest countries energy abundance will not be a problem. The question is at what long term ecological cost that energy abundance will come.

throwayyy479087 4y ago
The communist environmental record makes the US look druidic.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  Consumer capititalism and state capitalism aren't the only two options. Especially if the state capitalists and consumer capitalosts stop murdering people who try them out.
  - dymk 4y ago
    Capitalism reduced the cost of solar by 90% in 10 years.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Yeah. It has upsides and downsides...so does everything.
    - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      There's a report on how renewables got so cheap and various types of government support account for most of it. Here's a very pro market capitalism take that still makes this very clear: https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth
  - epistasis 4y ago
    Perhaps not, but since nobody has ever tried something else on a large scale, and there seems to be an almost taboo on speculating on those forms of society due to accusations of Utopianism.... what are we left with? I, for one, am not willing to support a revolution without a plan for the day after. It may be an OK thing to be an anti-capitalist, but if one defines desired outcomes only in terms of what not to be, it's pretty damn uninspired.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Revolution isn't the mass uprising of violence. That only happens at the end when the existing system initiates violence. Revolution is building and implementing the stuff that happens afterwards. It's building parallel power structures and systems that aren't part of the current one. Things like mutual aid networks and unions (real unions, not controlled opposition). A non-capitalist revolution looks like the Zapatistas or Rojava, not like larping the red army killing all the socialists. They generally get shut down by external violence followed by the people who enacted the violence saying "see! It ddn't work!". Another place to look is the formation of fascist states. Night of the long knives is not what made the nazi state, nor was Trump's failed insurrection what will lead the US the rest of the way into fascism. The actual work is the last ten years of undermining the education system with things like praeger U.
      - epistasis 4y ago
        > Revolution is building and implementing the stuff that happens afterwards. That's not a definition of revolution that I have ever heard a person use, or come close to capturing what anybody who I have heard advocate revolution speaks of, whether that's in historical text or contemporary discussion. It's exceptionally rare that a revolution is about building the new system, it's actually about shifting the power structure. But I want a solid description of what sort of democratic control could replace the economic system of capitalism, by building it. Until then, incrementally changing but by bit seems like the only feasible way to discover better systems.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago
        > It's exceptionally rare that a revolution is about building the new system, it's actually about shifting the power structure. So it's not about shifting the power structure, it's about shifting the power structure? You can't shift power onto a structure if that structure doesn't exist. > But I want a solid description of what sort of democratic control could replace the economic system of capitalism, by building it. Until then, incrementally changing but by bit seems like the only feasible way to discover better systems. The things that were democratic and non-capitalist that we've already had and are losing. Unions, (functioning non-capital-serving) universities, well managed utilities, co-ops, cohesive communities, public blue-sky science institutions, public mass transit, collective healthcare, mutual aid networks, a functioning commons, libraries, public education. Moreover, the important bit is not using every bit of economic, military, propaganda, and espionage power available to destroy the more radical experiments that people try in various parts of the world, and then using your own warcrimes as some kind of gotchya against the systems they're trying.
- satellites 4y ago
  Absolute bullshit. Not that communist countries were particularly environmentalist. But the US has mastered the art of offloading negative externalities to the third world while pretending to care about the environment. On the whole, the US is probably the most disastrous nation state to ever exist in terms of environmental damage.
- DubiousPusher 4y ago
  Certainly. If the biosphere cannot stand in the way of economic progress in a free society, what chance does it stand when stacked against the high moral ambition of lifting all of humanity out of poverty at the behest of a totalitarian state. In the end, the Soviet Union intended to develop it's own consumer capitalism, albeit heavily mediated through the state. You can see late Soviet propaganda which attempts to entice the public's support through pictures of families in the newest apartment projects with TVs and cozy new clothing.

throwayyy479087 4y ago

The communist environmental record makes the US look druidic.

Schroedingersat 4y ago
Consumer capititalism and state capitalism aren't the only two options. Especially if the state capitalists and consumer capitalosts stop murdering people who try them out.
- dymk 4y ago
  Capitalism reduced the cost of solar by 90% in 10 years.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Yeah. It has upsides and downsides...so does everything.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    There's a report on how renewables got so cheap and various types of government support account for most of it. Here's a very pro market capitalism take that still makes this very clear: https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth https://ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth
- epistasis 4y ago
  Perhaps not, but since nobody has ever tried something else on a large scale, and there seems to be an almost taboo on speculating on those forms of society due to accusations of Utopianism.... what are we left with? I, for one, am not willing to support a revolution without a plan for the day after. It may be an OK thing to be an anti-capitalist, but if one defines desired outcomes only in terms of what not to be, it's pretty damn uninspired.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Revolution isn't the mass uprising of violence. That only happens at the end when the existing system initiates violence. Revolution is building and implementing the stuff that happens afterwards. It's building parallel power structures and systems that aren't part of the current one. Things like mutual aid networks and unions (real unions, not controlled opposition). A non-capitalist revolution looks like the Zapatistas or Rojava, not like larping the red army killing all the socialists. They generally get shut down by external violence followed by the people who enacted the violence saying "see! It ddn't work!". Another place to look is the formation of fascist states. Night of the long knives is not what made the nazi state, nor was Trump's failed insurrection what will lead the US the rest of the way into fascism. The actual work is the last ten years of undermining the education system with things like praeger U.
    - epistasis 4y ago
      > Revolution is building and implementing the stuff that happens afterwards. That's not a definition of revolution that I have ever heard a person use, or come close to capturing what anybody who I have heard advocate revolution speaks of, whether that's in historical text or contemporary discussion. It's exceptionally rare that a revolution is about building the new system, it's actually about shifting the power structure. But I want a solid description of what sort of democratic control could replace the economic system of capitalism, by building it. Until then, incrementally changing but by bit seems like the only feasible way to discover better systems.
      - Schroedingersat 4y ago
        > It's exceptionally rare that a revolution is about building the new system, it's actually about shifting the power structure. So it's not about shifting the power structure, it's about shifting the power structure? You can't shift power onto a structure if that structure doesn't exist. > But I want a solid description of what sort of democratic control could replace the economic system of capitalism, by building it. Until then, incrementally changing but by bit seems like the only feasible way to discover better systems. The things that were democratic and non-capitalist that we've already had and are losing. Unions, (functioning non-capital-serving) universities, well managed utilities, co-ops, cohesive communities, public blue-sky science institutions, public mass transit, collective healthcare, mutual aid networks, a functioning commons, libraries, public education. Moreover, the important bit is not using every bit of economic, military, propaganda, and espionage power available to destroy the more radical experiments that people try in various parts of the world, and then using your own warcrimes as some kind of gotchya against the systems they're trying.
satellites 4y ago
Absolute bullshit. Not that communist countries were particularly environmentalist. But the US has mastered the art of offloading negative externalities to the third world while pretending to care about the environment. On the whole, the US is probably the most disastrous nation state to ever exist in terms of environmental damage.
DubiousPusher 4y ago
Certainly. If the biosphere cannot stand in the way of economic progress in a free society, what chance does it stand when stacked against the high moral ambition of lifting all of humanity out of poverty at the behest of a totalitarian state. In the end, the Soviet Union intended to develop it's own consumer capitalism, albeit heavily mediated through the state. You can see late Soviet propaganda which attempts to entice the public's support through pictures of families in the newest apartment projects with TVs and cozy new clothing.