Scientists have been pounding the table warning about climate change for decades, often at the expense of their own careers, only to be ignored by politicians.
And now that the climate is spinning out of control, it's somehow the fault of scientists??
I say this with all due respect to all those who promote this take: f#ck off.
@petergleick as someone who first attended a climate change discussion among policy makers, scientists and industrial reps 30 years ago, I'm pretty sure it's not that scientists weren't providing good information, it's that policy makers and industry leaders didn't want to know. (Communicating involves 2 parties)
The Boxer makes this point early on (https://youtu.be/wzUEL7vw60U)
I think it is about high time to turn the table, and massively point fingers at the capitalists and their outlets, corporate media, as the main reason and source of climate change.
The rich capitalists are the biggest CO² emitters, and going by the damages they caused to society, they should normally be all arrested and have their entire properties/assets confiscated. This would be the least for them to repay some of the damage they have done not only to our planet, but also to their own kind.
Blaming capitalists is spot on. But do they own all the blame?
If Ford is wrong to build the F-150 then surely so is the driver who buys it. The MSM channelled the ads directly and indirectly but that also includes an Inconvenient Truth 20 years ago. No one can deny drivers, like politicians, haven't been told the consequences. It's just that so many choose to ignore it.
We do have sentience of a sort?
"We do have sentience of a sort?"
Sure, we do. But, do we have the power to change what has been installed by capitalists and their umbrella organizations, consisting of media, industry, etc.?
Yes, we do. But only if we band together in millions. And even if we do band together to protest in millions, we only get small adjustments to the current system in the end, which will soon be rewound once public attentions is being distracted elsewhere.
Do capitalists need to band together in millions to change laws, policies, or moral values?
No, they don't. They buy politicians and influence the common people through their companies.
You mentioned cars. I live in Germany. The land of cars. All our cars are made by a few global mega corporations like Mercedes, BMW, VW, etc. All of these companies stem from being private-owned manufacturers (all of them fervent supporters of Hitler and his Nazis btw). The families owning those companies, now very very rich after selling a part of their company stocks, influenced politicians in this country to build cities for cars, build roads across the whole country so that you can get anywhere with cars. They influenced children and adults alike through advertisements and publicity events, praising their cars. They used the media to indoctrinate everyone about the idea of having to own a car as normal rule of nature.
I don't own a car. But, if I want to travel quickly over a bigger distance, I need to account for longer travel times and other inconveniences.
Why?
Because of all these actions I mentioned above by the car capitalists, public transportation only works so-so.
So tell me, is it wrong for a person, who has to get to work every morning to earn enough money for living, because they're a labor slave of capitalists, to buy a Ford F-150 when their only other option would be to walk?
Or is it the fault of the politicians, who have been bought out, for neglecting the building of a public transportation system which would allow that person to get to work quickly without having to buy that Ford F-150?
Or is it the fault of the capitalists for having bought the politicians in order to create an environment where people are forced to buy Ford F-150s because they need to make a living by working as slaves in capitalist companies?
The answer to your question is there are zillions of alternatives to a F-150 of which at least 99% are less worse and do the job.
I would suggest that you can't pin all the blame for gas-guzzlers on Ford, GM et al. It's a choice and folks should be accountable for their choices if we are to hold politicians to the same account.
Shifting blame is easy. Owning it is more difficult.
My words were no appeal to dismiss accountability.
My words were about targeting the ones behind the politicians. Following the money, in most cases, leads to the source of a problem. And this thumb rule applies here as well.
Sure, we can say the people are accountable because they elected the politicians, and the politicians are accountable because they took the money of capitalists, etc.
But, I'm more interested in solving the problem than solving the question who's to blame the most.
And in my eyes, disowning the capitalists and forbidding private ownership of land, companies, and other assets, which should belong to the community/society, would be the quickest way to stomp out one of the major reasons why things are heading in such a bad direction right now.
I'm well aware that this would come with its own set of new problems, most likely.
But, right now we're heading for Game Over, so we might as well try to topple the playing field.
@TobiWanKenobi @petergleick
@TobiWanKenobi @petergleick
I'm pessimistic about overthrowing capitalism. The revolution has been coming for 150 years and going backwards since 1968.
Social revolutions come a lot wicker. Smoking has become socially unacceptable in public areas in many places. The end of apartheid and the NI Good Friday happened after a very short time. Ending car domination, frequent flying and fossil fuel extraction can't wait.
You cannot overthrow a system that works (even if only for a minority). Only a drastic shift in power within a system, be it through internal or external factors, allows for a change.
So far capitalism's sole real opponent in rich western societies has been the social aspect, and as you rightfully described, capitalists managed to push that internal factor away through deception, corruption, and distraction
But, with climate change having joined the fray as an external factor, things have started to massively shift against capitalism.
Still, as with any change, revolutionary or peaceful, conservative forces will push back, even if the die has already been cast.
A number of people (a minority) has amassed a lot of wealth, assets, and power. They're mobilizing everything they have to keep what they deem to be rightfully theirs.
And this is also why we're seeing Neo-Fascism and a massive right-shift these days.
But, you can debate ideas on how to organize societies. You can deny political or economical systems. You can reject everything man invents.
Yet, you cannot do the same for the laws of nature. Physics aren't debatable or deniable. They apply to all, be it on this planet or any other inhabited planet.
The die has been cast.
Personally I believe the only choice we humans have left is to design the necessary changes ourselves or have them imposed on us by force (nature).
As such, I'm positive about capitalism coming to an end, rather sooner than later. But I do not know whether the future system will be much better or much worse. I hope and fight for former, but fear we will see latter.
I'm with you that climate collapse will likely destroy capitalism as we know it. Our difference is I feel the climate is a more effective disruptor than people and governments.
Bottom line is it easier to change people than capitalism. That's probably the best chance to mitigate climate change. Paradoxically saving the planet might also save capitalism.
Capitalism doesn't work without growth. If the danger of climate change changes people, then growth will be the first thing to go -> infinite growth in a finite world is impossible, even if you outsource the extraction of resources and pollution to other countries, calling that hoax decoupling.
Saving the planet will inevitably lead to the end of capitalism. The only question is whether the planet saves itself or mankind does the saving, and I think we agree on which of those two choices will likely apply here.
@petergleick It's like that scene from, the Chernobyl miniseries, where they're about to say "sounds like this isn't a big deal" & the scientist interjects a bit too strongly & Gorbachev chides him for emotional fearmongering.
I've been in that position (w/ much lower stakes) in my career in IT, trying to warn that bad policies will cause breaches. If you undersell it, you didn't warn them. If you oversell it, you're fearmongering.
You can't win.
@petergleick @StillIRise1963 Saw this headline earlier. Gah. Meanwhile, I’ve spent the last several years realizing all the scientific communication I got as far back as a teenager in the ‘80s accurately predicted all of this.
I’d also ask how such an entrenched anti-science ‘hoax’ culture developed if not in reaction to effective scientific communication.
Agree and Munich Re and Lloyds of London also warned of this in 1974 and the costs of doing nothing both economically and in human terms . The oil corps now making record profits also knew of this and decided to hide it and systematically attack any who spoke truth ,
Govts/Corps /Money conspired to grow disasters
@petergleick Right wtf is this, pretty sure every year we've been saying shit like "GUYS THE HUMAN RACE IS IN DANGER, WE MIGHT ALL DIE" for at least the last 2 decades.
Its not our fault they've been plugging their ears with oil money.
And here's the kicker - is this some kind of sudden realization and turnaround moment? Fuck no lol, they are going to stick their head back in the sand tomorrow and wonder why texas is getting so cold later this year.
@petergleick Absolutely with you.
Meanwhile organisations with millions and billions of dollars are pushing the case against climate action. They're lobbying and writing press releases and killing stories that they don't like and paying the journalists who they like.
It's unsurprising to find those same journalists, working for companies paid by the oil and gas industry, pretending to blink like idiots at the news that we've been complaining about fossil fuel use for decades. It wouldn't be their fault, would it?
@petergleick if its clear they wont listen to words, a different course of action would be ideal.
i mean the definition if insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
@petergleick You'll be gratified to hear that when a link to that The Hill nonsense "Scientists failed ..." was posted on theothersite, over 2000 people immediately began posting angry rebuttals in the form of Carl Sagan's 1985 remarks to US Congress and excerpts from Frank Capra's 1958 film Climate Change and many others.
Lots just said You working for Exxon now or what?
So I kinda think you won this round.
@petergleick As someone who wrote a book on climate science and climate change published in 1989...
...
...
I concur.
Peter Gleick
NorCal Lynne
ColesStreetPothole
Paul Wermer, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
ZZ Bottom
Lazarou Monkey Terror 🚀💙🌈
TobiWanKenobi
stuart
Gorgeous na Shock!
Adam Ambrose
GDR!
Sérgio Machado
nebulos
cohomology is FUN!
Mats Holberg 🇺🇦
Pat
Figaro
Shiny Amygdala, ph.D
TrashkittenDeluxe
PaulWay
Goldenrod
Danette 🐬
Alison Creekside
Tom Levenson
Jeff Zugale - Z Factory
Spookybot 
Dan 🦺 Deboer
THIS ACCOUNT HAS MOVED
バツ子（犬いっぱい日々ナウ
Mr Lawrence 🇪🇺🇷🇼
SmashedRatOnPress
Anya 👁️