Anonymous #1 6w

I’m not saying that capitalism doesn’t need to be done away with altogether eventually and that we are on kind of a time crunch given the current state of the climate but I feel like the current approach really isn’t working

1

Anonymous #1 6w

if it was 30 or 40 years ago, I’d agree with you (even tho I wouldn’t be alive), hell even 15 or 20 years ago this approach would’ve been viable but we’ve already passed the point of no return. it is now impossible to reverse all of the eventual expected impacts of anthropogenic climate change, and the extent of those impacts are worsening by the day.

-4

Anonymous #1 6w

like right now it’s about mitigating how many will die over the next two centuries, but we’ve already ensured that people die and be displaced. personally, this is the lives of everyone on the planet at stake, capitalism and the existing institutions that allowed for this existential situation should be overthrown immediately; with or without permission from existing governments. ensuring a “smooth transition” is not worth the rise in the expected death toll.

0

Anonymous OP 6w

like we’re expected to pass 2.0C warming by the 2030s now… a decade ago it wasn’t expected to reach that point until at least the 2050s….

1

Anonymous OP 6w

I already know everything you said. We are genuinely so fucked. Literally all we can do at this point is try to make the planet normal again for our descendants 100-150 years in the future. The carbon in the atmosphere is not coming out in our lifetimes. We should focus on more attainable solutions that can have fast effects (such as methane reduction/recapture) while slowing carbon emissions. We are an oil-centric country currently. If we banned all carbon emissions and pollution in a day…

1

Anonymous OP 6w

That would cause complete economic collapse. What we can do is incentivize energy companies to build renewable energy infrastructure to create a slow shift. Sitting up on a moral high ground and yelling about carbon emissions all day isn’t going to convince anyone to save the planet. There is not a single ideal outcome to our current situation. The best we can do right now is opt for a slower but complete transition to maybe make the planet normal again later down the line

1

Anonymous #1 6w

complete economic collapse is far better and more preferable to complete biosphere collapse… quite frankly, who gives a flying fuck about the economy when it’s killing us, and dooming our descendants?

1

Anonymous #1 6w

we had ideal outcomes, people are far too addicted to the comfort of our current way of life, and far too unwilling to make the changes necessary. this is not an issue of not knowing how to solve the issue, it is purely an issue of not being willing to. our greed, and arrogance, will ultimately be our downfall and the thing that causes the extinction of the human race. if that does happen, hopefully we don’t take the rest of the life on the planet with us.

1

Anonymous OP 6w

Causing an immediate catastrophe that would kill tens of millions of people (if not more) is generally not a favorable choice in the eyes of voters. Plus the rest of the world would go on producing greenhouse gases like nothing even happened. Like sure it would be better for the world over time but technically a disaster that wipes out 90% of the population of the world would do wonders for the environment

1

Anonymous OP 6w

Like you’re talking to me about all these world ending problems and human unwillingness to change. What is your perspective on how to move forward?

1

Anonymous #1 6w

that’s pure fearmongering, we are able to transition the economy off fossil fuels without it having to have that large an impact, but the fossil fuel industry spends millions annually lobbying otherwise. we have the technology and capability to completely phase out the mass use of fossil fuels, the one thing stopping that is entirely greed; the pursuit of maximizing profit as much as possible, by any means possible. stop acting like it’s anything other than that.

1

Anonymous OP 6w

We do not currently have the infrastructure to do that BECAUSE we are so dependent on oil due to lobbying. My solution is end subsidies to those companies unless they invest drastically in renewables, give those same subsidies to renewable companies, and increase taxes on oil companies

1

Anonymous #1 6w

I’ve been saying that we need to transition to renewables but I specifically said we can’t do it in a day and we may need to do it slowly

1

Anonymous #1 6w

preferably? a global unification of the working class and a forced redistribution of wealth across the world, essentially shifting the power from business owner to workers, which would make things a bit easier to facilitate in terms of rapidly halting fossil fuels productions and otherwise; but I know that wouldn’t realistically happen. if we had a functional government, I’d hope for some form of emergency nationalization under the justification of national security, geared towards all major

1

Anonymous OP 6w

fossil fuel production and processing facilities, as well as other energy production and resource extraction facilities, in order to begin a massive analysis in which facilities stay open and which should start being phased out. the thing about that approach is that it’s only for the US, and it would need to be spread unilaterally across the board for there to be any efficacy. maybe if the US is in board, there might be some hope for getting some type of binding resolution passed in the UN, but

1

Anonymous OP 6w

still. that’s kinda why I said the thing about 20 or 40 years ago. like we had the time for a gradual transition, but fossil fuels companies and lobbyists fucked us over on that front through their decade long disinformation campaigns

1