5 ms·
It's a simple tragedy of the commons. Except the commons is the entire planet. I do not believe democratic governments would ever be willing to take the needed
by mabbo 3y ago
It's a simple tragedy of the commons. Except the commons is the entire planet.
I do not believe democratic governments would ever be willing to take the needed steps to slow growth sufficiently to save the planet- they'd be voted out of office and replaced by someone else. Autocratic governments will never care enough to do anything to help anyone but themselves.
One begins to see why all the billionaires are trying to figure out how to escape the planet.
- kaba0 3y ago> One begins to see why all the billionaires are trying to figure out how to escape the planet After their greed being the reason why we are here.. but good news for them, there is nowhere else to go, they will rot with us here.
- defrost 3y ago> I do not believe democratic governments would ever be willing to take the needed steps Dysfunctional bicameral faux democratic governments such as the system that holds sway in the US at present will struggle - but they don't properly represent the will of the people at large. Every survey I've seen on health care or gun regulation for example shows the will of the public at odds with the actions of the government. THe founders were not fans of party politics .. and yet that became the emergenant behaviour, pandering to self interest and the highest bidders for attention and not to broad opinion.
- candiddevmike 3y agoI think it's because capitalism perverts everything into repeating the mantra "don't fuck with the money". You need to fix the economic system along with the government.
- blitz_skull 3y agoWhy does capitalism have to be your scapegoat? Why not go to the root—the lust for power. In essence that’s what money is anyway, it’s just a means to an end. Would you also fix the endless human desire for more? If you can, then you’ve got a shot. Otherwise, you don’t.
- HideousKojima 3y ago>Would you also fix the endless human desire for more? We could call it the New Soviet Man or something like that
- gruez 3y ago>I think it's because capitalism ... That's why communist countries are known for their carbon neutral economies, and being excellent stewards of the environment, right?
- ssabev 3y agoYeah and human rights and happiness, etc, etc. Source: product of 2 former commie countries. The after effects probably take 50+ years to undo
- ElectricalUnion 3y agoNo communist country exists, and most likely one will never exist. Calling countries "communist" is supposed to be a capitalist joke on communism being a unreacheable utopia.
- gruez 3y agoSuppose thats true. Then what explains the behavior of "communist" (but not True Communist) countries? They're polluting just like capitalist countries. Are they just undercover capitalists?
- ElectricalUnion 3y ago> Suppose thats true. A communist society would entail the absence of private property, social classes, money and the state. No stable, large scale "society without state" exists in the modern world.
- ansmithz42 3y agoWhat explains the "communist" countries behaviour is "Animal Farm". The "communist" countries are just a variant of Monarchies. They have replaced some of the birth-rite of monarchies but it is still the same with all the behind the scenes power plays and purges.
- goatlover 3y agoWell then a planned command-style economy instead of a free market using Marxism as it's motivating principle. I'm guessing most of the western critics of capitalism aren't tankies, so they probably have in mind some sort of democratic ownership of production where people choose degrowth over profit. To the extent that's doable at the scale of nations is unproven. Potential problem is someone like Stalin or Mao will always subvert the movement for their own personal power.
- defrost 3y agoI'd remark that it has less to do with capitalism and a great deal more to do with a lack of strong guard rails separating policy making (from elected offials) from undue influence (lobbyists and money). Have distinct silos for military, civil service, law (trials, not police or writing), etc. with harsh penalties for stepping out of line good rewards for duty are things that I rate highly in a government system. The case can be made that the US took a turn for the worse when the Supreme Court was allowed to go outside its remit of "do the least required" and wrote policy by making Citizens United legalise directly bribing officials. That was at least a two guard rail jumping systemic failure (IMHO).
- gruez 3y ago>The case can be made that the US took a turn for the worse when the Supreme Court was allowed to go outside its remit of "do the least required" and wrote policy by making Citizens United legalise directly bribing officials. 1. "legalise directly bribing officials" is a gross misrepresentation of Citizens United v. FEC. As per the wikipedia article, the ruling "prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations"[1]. In other words, it means the government can't prevent corporations from donating to groups that run political ads. "Bribing" has a specific meaning, which involves quid quo pro, and "corporations being able to spend money on political ads" is nowhere near that. 2. at the risk of starting another flame war, the "turn for the worse" happened decades before with roe v. wade, when they ruled that abortion was under the "right to privacy". Regardless of whether you think women should be allowed the right to abortion, justifying it under the 14th amendment is much more egregious than the supreme court ruling that the government can't restrict the speech of groups of people (ie. corporations). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
- defrost 3y agoThe case can be made, and there is no shortage of articles from the US that purport to make that case, it's a subject still hotly contested. Also, I carefully wrote a turn for the worse as there has been many twists and turns on the path between past and present. I admire your gumption in insisting upon the turn for the worse as if there has been only one and that Roe V. Wade was that moment. Popular opinion by the numbers within the USofA appears to disagree with your assessment.
- gruez 3y ago>Every survey I've seen on health care or gun regulation for example shows the will of the public at odds with the actions of the government. counterpoint: https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1355186871354200066 https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1355186871354200066
- DangitBobby 3y agoThe proposed ballot measure asked a different question from what was represented by the heatmap. It wouldn't have reduced other forms of taxation like the question posed for the heatmap, it would have instead redistributed the collected taxes to government programs. I probably wouldn't have said no because of that, but I know plenty of people who would.
- mycall 3y agoBased on the principles the country is founded on, these assumptions breed a First Past the Post which bifurcates individual principles and defaults to a binary system at large. Very emergent imho.
- defrost 3y agoYep. That was my introduction 40 years ago to iterative dynamics and voting systems - FPthePost converges to a non representative duopoly. I believe that to be an unintended outcome unforeseen by the US founders.
- irrational 3y agoI really don’t see the current Earth governments doing enough soon enough to make any difference. I’m afraid the best case scenario is worldwide mass revolts that literally kill all people in power and the worst case scenario is complete societal collapse due to mass migrations as the environment collapses.
- vasco 3y agoOr some beach houses will be flooded and everyone just moves 100 meters inland.
- kaba0 3y agoI’m sure the huge swathes of heavily populated regions on all continents that will be left without potable water and scorching hot temperatures will be content with it and not move to places that are actually habitable? Being climate change denialist is just utterly dumb at this point.
- vasco 3y agoI don't deny climate change, I deny your prediction of hell on earth.
- goatlover 3y agoKilling everyone in power just means new people will be put in power. Whether they will do a better job out of necessity just depends.
- irrational 3y agoWell, if the cycle repeats and enough people die, the entire situation will sort itself out.
- antegamisou 3y ago> One begins to see why all the billionaires are trying to figure out how to escape the planet. For starters, they can stop investing on creative ideas that accelerate its environmental collapse.
- goatlover 3y agoTo the extent they actually are trying to escape, they're idiots, since making any other planet (Mars) habitable is way harder and more costly than dealing with climate change. The Earth will retain a breathable atmosphere, shielded from radiation with surface liquid water and life that can adapt to a warmer climate. There's no realistic climate scenario in which Earth becomes Venus. That would require a far worse run-away greenhouse effect than has ever occurred on this planet. Most likely Venus had massive ongoing volcanic activity that surpassed any in Earth's history. The dinosaurs evolved in a world with four times the CO2 that we have today. Earth won't become uninhabitable, however serious climate change becomes. That's just not a thing.
- kaba0 3y agoNot only more costly, it is impossible with current technology.