3 ms·

> so why was there never a single unified plan with a single unified movement behind it? The UN and EU regularly publish evidence-based reports with multi-pron

> so why was there never a single unified plan with a single unified movement behind it? The UN and EU regularly publish evidence-based reports with multi-pronged recommendations. That seems to me as "unified" as you can get, in terms of multinational cooperation and holism in recommendations. But to have any concrete change you need political will, and that is obviously lacking. To get political will in democratic societies you need to convince people to elect their leaders on this and not taxes or pet special interests, which is why you have been hearing about this fight all your life.

yupitsme123 1y ago
First off, your's is a US-centric view. Other countries don't have those same obstacles but as far as I know their progress in eliminating CO2 has only been slightly better than ours. Second, I don't see why political will is necessary. Most of the big changes that have happened in our lives over the past decades have had nothing to do with laws being passed or voters voting for anything. On the contrary private interests basically do what they want and the government getting involvement is seen as a hindrance not a help.
- queenkjuul 1y ago
  I mean did you not just answer your own question? Political will comes from private interests, who are more concerned with next quarters profits than the plight of humanity. I disagree with other commenters that the opinion of common people matters. Most Western political projects are tied to capital, not people.
- jhanschoo 1y ago
  > Second, I don't see why political will is necessary. > Most of the big changes that have happened in our lives over the past decades have had nothing to do with laws being passed or voters voting for anything. I can agree with the latter without agreeing with the former. But political will and oil go hand-in-hand. Governments have been destroyed by foreign interests in oil. Governments hostile to their people have been maintained by foreign interests in oil. Governments giving great security to its people have been built from sovereign oil. Writing this response made me realize that you are right. Considering the means and methods of countervailing interests, democratic persuasion does not seem anywhere near sufficient, even though these are the methods being used by advocates. A surer path might involve highly militant and capable states willing to perform espionage, terrorism, and regime change to pursue environmental goals.

yupitsme123 1y ago

First off, your's is a US-centric view. Other countries don't have those same obstacles but as far as I know their progress in eliminating CO2 has only been slightly better than ours. Second, I don't see why political will is necessary. Most of the big changes that have happened in our lives over the past decades have had nothing to do with laws being passed or voters voting for anything. On the contrary private interests basically do what they want and the government getting involvement is seen as a hindrance not a help.

queenkjuul 1y ago
I mean did you not just answer your own question? Political will comes from private interests, who are more concerned with next quarters profits than the plight of humanity. I disagree with other commenters that the opinion of common people matters. Most Western political projects are tied to capital, not people.
jhanschoo 1y ago
> Second, I don't see why political will is necessary. > Most of the big changes that have happened in our lives over the past decades have had nothing to do with laws being passed or voters voting for anything. I can agree with the latter without agreeing with the former. But political will and oil go hand-in-hand. Governments have been destroyed by foreign interests in oil. Governments hostile to their people have been maintained by foreign interests in oil. Governments giving great security to its people have been built from sovereign oil. Writing this response made me realize that you are right. Considering the means and methods of countervailing interests, democratic persuasion does not seem anywhere near sufficient, even though these are the methods being used by advocates. A surer path might involve highly militant and capable states willing to perform espionage, terrorism, and regime change to pursue environmental goals.