Big Oil is the new Nero, fiddling away while the world burns.
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
118 points (97.6% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5301 readers
1049 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So they can have an outsized share of a wasteland
Reminder: If you aren't fighting conservatism, you aren't fighting climate change.
Conservatives are the henchmen of the biggest polluters on the planet. These polluters use conservatives (and neo-liberals) as their political and social shields. We cannot defeat the pollution lobby unless we first defeat their conservative henchmen in politics and in our daily lives.
Do your part by excluding conservatives from your daily life. Conservatism is vile and should be treated as such. It should be shunned from polite society and openly discussed as the grotesque, deadly plague that it is. Nothing good in history has ever come from conservatism. Nothing.
Reminder Meloni is a facist and not a conservative.
They are the same picture.
Conservatives want to keep the system as it is or at least only do minimal repairs to keep it going. In the West that means they are currently liberals.
Facists want to create racist, militaristic dictatorships.
To give you an example. Biden is a conservative for the most part and Trump is a facist.
It is like a layman theory and a scientific theory.
While the meaning of conservative initially meant slow to change, the political definition does not align with that at all. The current political definition of conservative is someone who wants to make rapid changes backwards by removing rights and opposing any social benefits that would help everyone.
As of the last few decades, politicians who identify as conservative are fascists.
The challenge is that exclusion isn't necessarily the best way to shift views. People can and do change, particularly if you can encourage them to change their media diet or you can get somebody whom they respect to explicitly talk about climate.
Changing the views of a conservative is a lost cause. Such efforts are the distraction that corporate polluters are paying big money to achieve. The goal is not to change their views, but to separate them from intelligent civilization. Let them live the way they demand to live. Poorly. If they become introspective and curious about the world, it is there for them to learn about. But that process comes from within. In the meantime, we must not be dragged down by conservatives. We should exclude them and move past them on a societal and commercial scale.
You can sometimes shift people a bit. You don't get some sudden flip in position, but can move people a few notches along, at least when interacting with somebody as a peer, and not in a situation where they're just out to troll.
That's very nice, but it will not be effective. This approach is the default approach for polite progressives and has failed for decades. The result is an environment where conservatives become more conservative despite the brief positive interactions.
The world's knowledge is available to them when they decide to seek it. Including them in conversations is only placating and distracting the progressive. It is not shifting anything substantial for the conservative.
It very much depends on context.
In the context of modern conservatives, their entire worldview negates progress and caring about people. Decades of experience have proven that this is the case.
Conservative or progressive is often associated with political party's.
E.g., if the evidence suggests we should take a precautionary approach & not gamble the stability of the planet's climate on an unproven "carbon capture" tech, that would be conservative, or a precautionary approach (prudence).
But, the conservative party's & industries are promoting carbon capture. They're not conservative (cautious), they're venture capitalists (gambling for a profit)
It is time that that everyone changes their view from me to us. Our wealth originates from the exploitation of nature and other states. First and foremost the big industries and very rich people should be held responsible. But I am not better than they if I shut the door for people which are fleeing climate desasters. It ashames me, that we call for highly educated foreigerns because the workforce is missing and at the same time do nothing about sinking emigrant ships. I am trying to do my part (using public transport, don't use flights for vacations, turning the the heater down during winter) but if at the same time the richer get richer and the poorer poorer politics loose their credibility. If everyone steps down their luxury we would have enough money to help poorer people and we would save a lot of resources. No one has the natural right to own more than any other one. That is a lie capitalism told us...
please add the body of the article in the description.
I'm not going to do that because it's a magnet for copyright complaints.
Wait until large parts of Africa become uninhabitable because of the climate change.