3 ms·
> “The idea that we can make the planet more habitable on an environmental, on the environmental front by impoverishing poor people, by raising energy prices an
by dwb 3y ago
> “The idea that we can make the planet more habitable on an environmental, on the environmental front by impoverishing poor people, by raising energy prices and food prices, is absolutely, it’s not only absurd logically, but I think it’s tantamount to genocidal,” Peterson says in one YouTube video his channel posted in 2022.
The problem here, as I see it, is that while I am completely with mainstream science on climate change (and all other issues it's qualified to speak on), and I think Jordan Peterson is a ridiculous figure, there is a kernel of truth to criticisms like this – the economic structure of this world means that yeah, poor people probably will bear the brunt of any changes, even if they're necessary, and that's deeply unjust.
- ZeroGravitas 3y agoBy this argument I assume you think the poor will bear the brunt of any changes caused by climate change? So what's the argument that the interventions will hurt them more than the problem? Peterson has anbeasy answer, because he's a loon and doesn't believe in the problem or any of the solutions and can just tack concern for the poor on as rhetoric. But people who understand the problem and the solutions don't have that luxury.
- xoa 3y agoThis only works as an argument if you count the change cost but ignore the default cost. Like, if changing the world to stop global warming costs $5 trillion of which much is borne by the poor that's hard. But if doing nothing means $40 trillion in cost and even more lands on the poor, well now what? It's easy to criticize doing anything at all, but the most likely outcome of making perfect the enemy of good is that no coordinated action happens at all and everyone just acts for themselves. And that's ignoring a lot of ways the developing world have acted to make themselves far worse off, yet then constantly have cried wolf about blaming others. Fatigue even amongst those who cares matters, as does relative advantage and leverage.
- dwb 3y agoI more or less agree (though I don't know about blaming the developing world so much given how little they've contributed to the problem in the first place!), and I'm certainly not trying to support Peterson's argument wholesale. But no matter how much it all makes sense in these terms, it's a really tough sell and I can totally see why. We live in a world which has made arguing for collective responsibility, a shared burden, virtually impossible – and that's certainly not down to the politics that I favour.
- tootie 3y agoSure, but policy makers are thoroughly aware of that and it's why no policy in the world endorses making energy less affordable or available. It's the entire reason that greening the grid is so slow and expensive because it has to be done without causing blowback or hardship. So, Peterson is very much arguing against a strawman.
- dwb 3y agoWell I certainly hope changes come to pass in that spirit, world-wide. I can see that happening in some wealthier countries, if you're lucky, and the right government is in power. I'd love to be proved absurdly pessimistic, of course.