3 ms·

A corporation getting its way, irrespective of the democratic will of the people, or rather, those "insane NIMBYs". Corporatocracy truly is a beautiful thing.

burnte 2y ago
> A corporation getting its way, irrespective of the democratic will of the people, or rather, those "insane NIMBYs". Corporatocracy truly is a beautiful thing. Generally a NIMBY is anti-progress and very selfish, putting themselves ahead of everyone. My dad was called to help resolve TMI during the meltdown and was part of the engineering design group the the Beaver Valley nuclear power station. People were complaining they had cows dying of radiation years before the plant was completed. NIMBYs suck.
- VoodooJuJu 2y ago
  >a NIMBY is anti-progress And what is "progress"? We both have ideas about what progress is. Are mine the same as yours?
  - ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
    Does your definition of progress say that a civilization that gets safer, cheaper, carbon-neutral power has progressed?
  - skeaker 2y ago
    In this context, progress would probably refer to moving to a power source that doesn't kill people or destroy the planet. I think that is generally pretty agreeable even if you want to get into a definitional argument.
  - burnte 2y ago
    You can define it how you like, the nature of a NIMBY is that whatever it is, they don't want it near THEM (hence Not In My Back Yard) and affecting THEM, but they don't care about how it may affect others. If they were against whatever the thing is it wouldn't matter if it were their backyard or someone else's, they're only concerned with THEIR lives. When all you care about is you, you don't care about others and that's anti-progress.
kwere 2y ago
the democratic will should be only on state or common goods. On their land persons should be able to do whatever whitlist following safety guidelines. including operating a nuclear facility
pona-a 2y ago
But were said people well-informed to begin with? Voting can only work if everyone's on the same page regarding both the policy being implemented and its consequences, thus being able to defend their best interests. If the people have been consuming provably false messaging pushed by a fossil fuel industry lobby and sensationalist media, can they be trusted to make a choice that affects not just themselves their entire city, nation, and planet? The representative democracy does attempt to solve this problem; you pick a representative you understand is aligned with your interests on the issues you do understand and trust they and their experts will do well on the rest. It's not a perfect system, but unless the populace can be given free time and education to consider individual policies based on reliable evidence and not hearsay from biased sources, it's the best we can do.

burnte 2y ago

> A corporation getting its way, irrespective of the democratic will of the people, or rather, those "insane NIMBYs". Corporatocracy truly is a beautiful thing. Generally a NIMBY is anti-progress and very selfish, putting themselves ahead of everyone. My dad was called to help resolve TMI during the meltdown and was part of the engineering design group the the Beaver Valley nuclear power station. People were complaining they had cows dying of radiation years before the plant was completed. NIMBYs suck.

VoodooJuJu 2y ago
>a NIMBY is anti-progress And what is "progress"? We both have ideas about what progress is. Are mine the same as yours?
- ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
  Does your definition of progress say that a civilization that gets safer, cheaper, carbon-neutral power has progressed?
- skeaker 2y ago
  In this context, progress would probably refer to moving to a power source that doesn't kill people or destroy the planet. I think that is generally pretty agreeable even if you want to get into a definitional argument.
- burnte 2y ago
  You can define it how you like, the nature of a NIMBY is that whatever it is, they don't want it near THEM (hence Not In My Back Yard) and affecting THEM, but they don't care about how it may affect others. If they were against whatever the thing is it wouldn't matter if it were their backyard or someone else's, they're only concerned with THEIR lives. When all you care about is you, you don't care about others and that's anti-progress.

kwere 2y ago

the democratic will should be only on state or common goods. On their land persons should be able to do whatever whitlist following safety guidelines. including operating a nuclear facility

pona-a 2y ago

But were said people well-informed to begin with? Voting can only work if everyone's on the same page regarding both the policy being implemented and its consequences, thus being able to defend their best interests. If the people have been consuming provably false messaging pushed by a fossil fuel industry lobby and sensationalist media, can they be trusted to make a choice that affects not just themselves their entire city, nation, and planet? The representative democracy does attempt to solve this problem; you pick a representative you understand is aligned with your interests on the issues you do understand and trust they and their experts will do well on the rest. It's not a perfect system, but unless the populace can be given free time and education to consider individual policies based on reliable evidence and not hearsay from biased sources, it's the best we can do.