6 ms·

I wish humanity could discard narrow-minded nationalist/short-sighted capitalist tendencies and unite against this threat. Imagine a climate pact between the US

I wish humanity could discard narrow-minded nationalist/short-sighted capitalist tendencies and unite against this threat. Imagine a climate pact between the US, EU, China and India where each society placed a similar focus on pivoting to renewables and developing reliable fusion energy as the Allies devoted to winning ww2 and developing atomic weaponry. Amusingly, the end of our dependency would also resolve many geopolitical concerns. However, governments across the globe are run by people who lack the proper morals or intelligence to see what needs to be done.

jcbrand 4y ago
However, governments across the globe are run by people who lack the proper morals or intelligence to see what needs to be done. So we should just put you in charge and then you'll sort it out? Have you considered the possibility that it's not about morals or intelligence but that it's actually an intractable problem?
- a_shovel 4y ago
  > So we should just put you in charge and then you'll sort it out? Have you considered this is exactly the kind of narrow-mindedness they're probably talking about? If I had written the parent post, that's what I would mean by that. This simple-minded paranoia that any proposal from anyone else is secretly an evil plot to take over the world is ridiculous.
  - embeng4096 4y ago
    >> Have you considered the possibility that it's not about morals or intelligence but that it's actually an intractable problem? I don't think they're saying, "this person is secretly plotting to take over the world". I think they're saying, "have you considered that this is actually a hard problem and not as simple as you make it out to be?"
  - mistermann 4y ago
    To be fair, thinking and writing without error (on topics like this) is hard, and it's rather culturally frowned upon here and elsewhere.
ericmay 4y ago
> focus on pivoting to renewables and developing reliable fusion energy... You know that this would be accomplished through capitalism right? The more we rail against capitalism and free markets (which every successful country from Denmark to Australia uses) the less likely we'll ever be to solve any problems. The market is an unwieldy force that can be generally shaped in a direction by the people (purchasing decisions, sacrificing convenience) and the government (regulation, law, market fairness) to massively solve problems through innovation, technology, and other means. Ignoring the market, or restricting its capabilities leaves us with little to no tools to combat problems. The much greater problem than "capitalist tendencies" is solving for people who absolutely refuse to modify their lifestyles (I must have my SUV and drive it comfortably and quickly to Costco on the 5 lane highway) to which market forces simply respond to, and who deny that humans are having a substantial effect on the global climate and would rather elect charlatans than people of substance. On the other hand, we're trapped in a prisoner's dilemma with the very countries you mention. It's a very bad situation we face, but I find that blaming capitalism or markets for failures of government to be counter-productive and in some ways actively hostile to working on addressing climate change.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  I really can't find any substance in this argument. You're just saying "capitalism isn't the problem, it's the solution!" without offering anything that would convince someone who doesn't already believe that.
- zb1plus 4y ago
  I actually think capitalism and free markets are the most viable solution. The problem is "short-sighted" capitalism that focuses on quarterly "hand to mouth" profits as opposed to people seeing the long-term business opportunities that lie in pivoting to renewables. As much as I detest Elon Musk, I think making the eco-friendly option cool and desirable for reasons beyond environmental impact is one of the best ways to encourage growth towards a more eco-friendly society.
  - klyrs 4y ago
guerrilla 4y ago
Everyone, even bitter permanent enemies and polar opposites, came together to fight ISIS, so I think there's a chance, even if it's tiny.
afarrell 4y ago
> similar focus … as the allies devoted to winning ww2 Given a choice between diverting attention & resources to alleviate a 1943 famine in Bengal and keeping transport ships available for the war, Britain chose to allow the famine. As a result, an estimated 2.1 to 3.8 million Bengalis perished. If you want people to take your vision seriously enough to follow it, you’ll need to engage seriously with the horrors of what you praise. Please consider reading the book Slaughterhouse Five. Governments across the globe are run by people whom I hope remember to be humble about their intelligence and moral wisdom.
Yizahi 4y ago
The problem is not capitalists or communists or whateverists. The problem is sociopaths in power. Until we, collectively as a humanity, won't start regularly vetting people in power for the mental disorders, of all types - genetic, old age, chemically induced, regular mental illnesses etc. we will continue to suffer. And political compass of they day won't matter at all.
- erklik 4y ago
  > Until we, collectively as a humanity, won't start regularly vetting people in power for the mental disorders, of all types - genetic, old age, chemically induced, regular mental illnesses etc. Who decides what a mental illness is? .... and back to Square One.
  - Yizahi 4y ago
    Sure, it's a super hard societal problem. But I guess step one would be publicly talk about it (in a serious way). Like invite doctors with that specialty to the talk shows and discuss who can be mentally ill, what can be consequences of this or that specific diagnose etc.
aww_dang 4y ago
When the problem can only be solved with global governance and the "proper morals and intelligence", I think it is worth questioning the premises. How much more apocalyptic fear mongering do we need to rationalize increased governance? When is enough enough? Cold war, drug war, war on terror, financial meltdown, pandemic emergency powers, nuclear apocalypse and of course climate doom. All used to rationalize further erosion of personal autonomy. Is no one else burnt out on the constant doom mongering from our betters? Is it because I lack the proper morals and intelligence that I feel skeptical?
- afarrell 4y ago
  No, what you are feeling is the natural exhaustion that comes from being absorbed in drama. The reality is that the situation is not an emergency. It is a slow-rolling problem that calls for sustained creativity.
dudeinjapan 4y ago
Capitalism discounts the present value of far-off catastrophes. This is for good reason: if WWIII breaks out tomorrow, climate change will be a far lesser concern for humanity (and indeed, WWIII may even solve the CO2 emission problem for us!) If we've learned anything since 2020, it pure hubris to claim we know what the future holds. When beachfront condos in Miami start flooding, the practical, obvious, cost-effective solutions to the problem (i.e. geoengineering) will look a lot more appealing.

jcbrand 4y ago

However, governments across the globe are run by people who lack the proper morals or intelligence to see what needs to be done. So we should just put you in charge and then you'll sort it out? Have you considered the possibility that it's not about morals or intelligence but that it's actually an intractable problem?

a_shovel 4y ago
> So we should just put you in charge and then you'll sort it out? Have you considered this is exactly the kind of narrow-mindedness they're probably talking about? If I had written the parent post, that's what I would mean by that. This simple-minded paranoia that any proposal from anyone else is secretly an evil plot to take over the world is ridiculous.
- embeng4096 4y ago
  >> Have you considered the possibility that it's not about morals or intelligence but that it's actually an intractable problem? I don't think they're saying, "this person is secretly plotting to take over the world". I think they're saying, "have you considered that this is actually a hard problem and not as simple as you make it out to be?"
- mistermann 4y ago
  To be fair, thinking and writing without error (on topics like this) is hard, and it's rather culturally frowned upon here and elsewhere.

ericmay 4y ago

> focus on pivoting to renewables and developing reliable fusion energy... You know that this would be accomplished through capitalism right? The more we rail against capitalism and free markets (which every successful country from Denmark to Australia uses) the less likely we'll ever be to solve any problems. The market is an unwieldy force that can be generally shaped in a direction by the people (purchasing decisions, sacrificing convenience) and the government (regulation, law, market fairness) to massively solve problems through innovation, technology, and other means. Ignoring the market, or restricting its capabilities leaves us with little to no tools to combat problems. The much greater problem than "capitalist tendencies" is solving for people who absolutely refuse to modify their lifestyles (I must have my SUV and drive it comfortably and quickly to Costco on the 5 lane highway) to which market forces simply respond to, and who deny that humans are having a substantial effect on the global climate and would rather elect charlatans than people of substance. On the other hand, we're trapped in a prisoner's dilemma with the very countries you mention. It's a very bad situation we face, but I find that blaming capitalism or markets for failures of government to be counter-productive and in some ways actively hostile to working on addressing climate change.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
I really can't find any substance in this argument. You're just saying "capitalism isn't the problem, it's the solution!" without offering anything that would convince someone who doesn't already believe that.
zb1plus 4y ago
I actually think capitalism and free markets are the most viable solution. The problem is "short-sighted" capitalism that focuses on quarterly "hand to mouth" profits as opposed to people seeing the long-term business opportunities that lie in pivoting to renewables. As much as I detest Elon Musk, I think making the eco-friendly option cool and desirable for reasons beyond environmental impact is one of the best ways to encourage growth towards a more eco-friendly society.
- klyrs 4y ago

guerrilla 4y ago

Everyone, even bitter permanent enemies and polar opposites, came together to fight ISIS, so I think there's a chance, even if it's tiny.

afarrell 4y ago

> similar focus … as the allies devoted to winning ww2 Given a choice between diverting attention & resources to alleviate a 1943 famine in Bengal and keeping transport ships available for the war, Britain chose to allow the famine. As a result, an estimated 2.1 to 3.8 million Bengalis perished. If you want people to take your vision seriously enough to follow it, you’ll need to engage seriously with the horrors of what you praise. Please consider reading the book Slaughterhouse Five. Governments across the globe are run by people whom I hope remember to be humble about their intelligence and moral wisdom.

Yizahi 4y ago

The problem is not capitalists or communists or whateverists. The problem is sociopaths in power. Until we, collectively as a humanity, won't start regularly vetting people in power for the mental disorders, of all types - genetic, old age, chemically induced, regular mental illnesses etc. we will continue to suffer. And political compass of they day won't matter at all.

erklik 4y ago
> Until we, collectively as a humanity, won't start regularly vetting people in power for the mental disorders, of all types - genetic, old age, chemically induced, regular mental illnesses etc. Who decides what a mental illness is? .... and back to Square One.
- Yizahi 4y ago
  Sure, it's a super hard societal problem. But I guess step one would be publicly talk about it (in a serious way). Like invite doctors with that specialty to the talk shows and discuss who can be mentally ill, what can be consequences of this or that specific diagnose etc.

aww_dang 4y ago

When the problem can only be solved with global governance and the "proper morals and intelligence", I think it is worth questioning the premises. How much more apocalyptic fear mongering do we need to rationalize increased governance? When is enough enough? Cold war, drug war, war on terror, financial meltdown, pandemic emergency powers, nuclear apocalypse and of course climate doom. All used to rationalize further erosion of personal autonomy. Is no one else burnt out on the constant doom mongering from our betters? Is it because I lack the proper morals and intelligence that I feel skeptical?

afarrell 4y ago
No, what you are feeling is the natural exhaustion that comes from being absorbed in drama. The reality is that the situation is not an emergency. It is a slow-rolling problem that calls for sustained creativity.

dudeinjapan 4y ago

Capitalism discounts the present value of far-off catastrophes. This is for good reason: if WWIII breaks out tomorrow, climate change will be a far lesser concern for humanity (and indeed, WWIII may even solve the CO2 emission problem for us!) If we've learned anything since 2020, it pure hubris to claim we know what the future holds. When beachfront condos in Miami start flooding, the practical, obvious, cost-effective solutions to the problem (i.e. geoengineering) will look a lot more appealing.