What's your thoughts on this?
OCR Output (chars: 1084)
I want to talk about the poor marketing of climate change
for the last 30 years.
1. The planet isn’t in danger; we are in danger
2. The planet has been through worse; we have not.
3. It's not being obsessed with nature; it's being obsessed
4. It shouldn't be “do you care about the environment?” It
should be “do you care about your environment?”
5. It's not global warming; it’s forced climate
6. It’s not controversial; it’s currently happening,
measurably. As predicted.
7. The planet doesn't care if we step up and heroically
change course, it'll be fine. We won't be.
8. The most nationalistic, selfish thing to do is ensure our
power and health is to keep the oil in the ground; it also
happens to be the most globalistic and humanitarian thing
to do as well.
9. Scientists aren't begging us to do anything; they are just
looking out the window and telling us the forest is on fire,
and holding the blinds open so we can see.
10. The climate isn’t an issue. It’s the one issue that
contains every single other issue.
Would you rather survive in a world without joy, or die early after using your life to the fullest?
The top 10% of wealthy people emit 50% of all emissions. The top 1% emit 15% by themselves. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/carbon-footprint-wealthy-people-97-percent-cut-un/
Worries about your standard of living going into decline are a red herring designed to get middle class people to defend the wealthy's standard of living.
You don't have to "give up" anything unless you are already at the very top.
@wolf480pl @tommy @Hamishcampbell Solarpunk is what combining eco-friendliness and reasonable equality looks like. We would ideally bring more people out of poverty instead of freezing the bottom 90% where they are and bringing the top 10% back down to Earth.
All I'm pointing out is that the typical person is not as guilty as they've been made out to be and a reasonable middle class lifestyle isn't what's destroying the planet.
However, for typical middle class and upper middle class USians we're talking about measures like "commute to work less if it can be done remotely" or "buy an EV" or "take fewer trips to Disneyland".
@icedquinn @Hamishcampbell @tommy @wolf480pl The real big ticket items are societal things like "stop requiring your office workers to commute" and "we should shut down that one really polluting coal plant" or upper class consumption like "stop flying between the US and Europe on a weekly basis on your private jet" and "your kids don't need to go to Disneyland every other week".
I don't see why this is an issue when a close reading of their figures suggest that most people in the US don't have to change their lives extremely anyway.
Also, if we assume they're playing up the role of wealthy people too much, then isn't the situation even worse?
We can transform the electricity grid and have a reliable supply.
We can transform mobility.
We can transform agriculture.
We can transform heating.
Engineers, companies and sientists developed the solutions. We nees to deploy them. Urgently. Do not read articles claiming "it is not possible" do read articles that focus on the how and the challenges on the road.
The alternative is so much worse and may lead to collaps of civilisation. It seems you prefer that with inaction. Do you?
Interesting framing. Is it being aimed at people who are more individualistic in their thinking? Is there a follow up with a call to action? Because I feel it's a bit like with Privacy, some folks feel it's too late and feel powerless so it's pointless. So once you get people thinking with those statements, what's next?
@Hamishcampbell I think there are very few people who don't understand climate change at this point. They're just looking for reasons to avoid taking action. For a summary, see this comic: https://www.leolinne.com/?portfolio=discourses-of-climate-delay
@Hamishcampbell 100%, fuck the polar bears, this is and has always been about humans. Been saying this for 13 years now.
we'll get extinct and the process will be panful
we oversell ourselves to ourselves
we're not so valuable or necessary
Life on this planet will eventually adapt and survive, though our own species will suffer billions of deaths and perhaps extinction if we do not act decisively now.
Moral dilemma - how extreme an action is acceptable if it results in significant change that saves many lives?
To support this server and the OMN project https://opencollective.com/open-media-network