Mastodawn

Bernd Thiele Mar 5, 2024

How much money do you think the United States has spent since 1945 on the Cold War? Sometimes they ask this question then from the back of the audience comes in answer ‘billions and billions‘. A huge underestimate – billions and billions. The amount of money that the United States has spent on the Cold War since 1945 is approximately 10 trillion dollars. Trillion, that’s the big one with the ‘T’. What could you buy with 10 trillion dollars? The answer is: You could buy everything in the United States except the land. Everything. Every building, truck, bus, car, boat, plane, pencil, baby’s diaper. Everything in the United States except the land, that’s what we have spent on the Cold War.

So, now let me ask: How certain was it that the Russians were going to invade? Was it 100% certain? Guess not since they never invaded. What if it was only let say 10% certain? What would advocates of big military buildup have said? We must be prudent. It’s not enough to count on only the most likely circumstance. If the worst happens and it’s really extremely dangerous for us we have to prepare for that. Remote contingencies if there is serious enough have the prepared for. It’s classic military thinking – you prepare for the worst case.

And so now, I ask my friends who are comfortable with that argument, including the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, why doesn’t that same argument apply to Global Warming. You don’t think it’s 100% likely? Fine. You are entitled to think that. If it’s only a small probability of it happening since the consequences are so serious, don’t you have to make some serious investment to prevent it or mitigate it? I think there’s a double standard of argument working and I don’t think we should permit it.

— Carl Sagan, An excerpt of a speech given on the 2nd of September in 1990 at the 5th Emerging Issues Forum at NCSU

Carl Sagan Keynote Speech at Emerging Issues Forum

YouTube

Jim Mar 4, 2024

@ErikUden It's one of the quirks of the decimal system (that we use). Everyone thinks the numbers go up by ten. So a Billionaire is ten times richer than a Millionaire, I doubt many people fully appreciate just how massive a billion is.

Heliograph Mar 5, 2024

@jimllmixit this is so true : / I wrote this down a while ago because my friend did not tell the units apart https://mastodon.au/@Heliograph/109923222025740867 @ErikUden

Heliograph (@[email protected])

Just to emphasise the magnitude of difference between #billion and #million : A million seconds is 12 days. A billion seconds is 31 years. #apropos #notsureyouknew

Mastodon Australia

Jim Mar 5, 2024

@Heliograph @ErikUden My parents seem to think that Billionaire is just the new Millionaire.

Heliograph Mar 5, 2024

@jimllmixit if you compare it with the nineties they probably are, but then again it was back then where this insanity should have been stopped in its tracks already 😬 @ErikUden

Barry Goldman Mar 9, 2024

@jimllmixit @ErikUden most americans dont reallize that a billion is TINY. there are a third of a billion americans in this country. a billion is PEANUTS.

Jim Mar 9, 2024

@barrygoldman1 @ErikUden Try eating a third of a billion peanuts, the dry roasted ones...😬

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@ErikUden @hosford42 The problem with arguments like this is that the person you are arguing with is in it for the money, not the precautionary principle. The precautionary principle worked to justify the Cold War, so it was used, to immense profit. The same principle works against continue profit in oil, so it is no longer the right argument to use. The point is to keep the cash cow going, not to prevent disaster.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@ErikUden @hosford42 So if we want this to change, the vast majority of people who already know we need to do something and already want to do it (that’s us!) need to find an effective way to use what power they have, and need to actually use it and not be discouraged by all the deliberate attempts to discourage action through doomsaying and other propaganda tactics.

Aaron Mar 4, 2024

@abhayakara @ErikUden Organized action!

Aaron Mar 4, 2024

@abhayakara @ErikUden Consider who is reading this, though. It may not work on the person being actually addressed, but the rest of us can see the hypocrisy. And if enough of us take notice and apply pressure, we can change what is profitable for those in power. So posting these sorts of things is far from pointless.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden The thing is, we are already aware of the problem. We already want to fix it. We are even aware of the hypocrisy. That’s not the knob that needs to be turned.

We need to be activated toward effective action. Not just activated. What is the effective action? What is the next step to take? That’s what we should be talking about.

Aaron Mar 4, 2024

@abhayakara @ErikUden I'm on board. Let's talk about it. What are the most effective actions we can take, right here, right now? Are there organizations we can join to help us coordinate those actions for maximal effectiveness? If not, we need to create them.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

I think fundamentally the task is that we need to use what power we have to (1) slow further acceleration in the wrong direction and (2) take the power from people who are not doing what is needed and give it to people who will.

(1) is, e.g. in the U.S., vote in the election, even though our choices are between the person who's going to accelerate harder in the wrong direction and the person who's going to accelerate less hard in the wrong direction.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

We have to do this, even though it might feel like we're supporting something bad.

Also in (1) is doing our best to hold on to what power we have and restore that power to people who've lost it (voting rights).

But (2) we need to get involved in the process of deciding who is put forth in the election, and we need to figure out how to win. And that's a long-term thing—we can't get discouraged if we don't win the primary this time.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

This is about trying to get the rocket ship back on the right course: if you are going in the exact wrong direction at .5c, and you can only accelerate at .05c per year, it's going to take a while to start actually moving in the right direction, and THAT'S OKAY!

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

And also I think we really really need to rejoice in our wins. A lot of really good stuff is happening. Just because a lot of bad stuff is also happening is not a reason to be discouraged.

A lot of effort is being expended to /get us/ to be discouraged. One of the ways we can make progress is to learn how to not be affected by those efforts—to see them for what they are, and laugh at them and at ourselves for our tendency to believe them.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

We really need to approach this with kindness rather than hatred, because it's incredibly hard to stay positive if you feel like you have to spew negativity all the time, and if you act on that belief.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

Like, yeah, the rich old folks who don't want to have stranded assets in the form of oil fields are doing a lot of harm. We want them to stop doing that harm. We don't need to hate them to stop them. We just need to stop them.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

BTW, part of the point of getting involved in primaries (in the U.S., or the equivalent elsewhere) is that it scares the people in power more than protests do. Protests have as a second-order effect that they might motivate some people to vote differently. Voting differently is the actual threat—the protests aren't.

Ted Lemon Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @ErikUden

What protests are great for is consciousness raising and community building, but there are lots of ways to do that besides protests that are less likely to get you arrested.

E.g., throw a party. Seriously.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 4, 2024

@hosford42 @abhayakara @ErikUden
1. Participate in a climate demonstration at least once a month.
2. Vote for the party/candidate that has the best and most radical climate politics where you live, on all political levels.
3. Talk about your fear of climate change in different situations, for example with friends and colleagues.
4. Try to reduce your own emissions as much as possible.

In this order.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

Unfortunately these are all things we've been doing since 1970 that haven't worked:

Moreover, several of them are actually tactics that have made us less effective.

Protests can be useful, mostly because they are a way to foster movements. They are effective when they gather popular support. They usually are used to discredit the movement, because they are so easy to misrepresent in the news. One person breaking a bottle and it's a violent protest.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

Voting only works if you are tactical about it. Voting does two things: it makes people who aren't really on your side but aren't against you take you seriously (if you do it right). And if you vote in primaries (in the U.S.), it allows you to change who is actually running in the general election, and then you might actually get to vote for someone who doesn't suck.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

But e.g. third parties in the U.S., which is not really a democracy, absolutely can't win elections. The whole system is set up to prevent that. Parties sometimes use third party voters to draw votes away from the other party. So voting third party in the U.S. at least is always a net lose. It literally can't do anytihng except the opposite of what you want.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

Talking about fear makes people feel hopeless. And then they don't show up. So no, taliking about your fears about climate change doesn't help. Poeple are already more than afraid enough of climate change. Doing something about climate change is /hugely/ popular. The problem isn't that people don't want to do somethign about it.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

And the last one, "making good choices," suggests that we are the problem and we need to change. But really we aren't the problem. The problem is systemic. The system needs to change.

I'm sure you've heard of the Jevons paradox. It's a real thing. Markets adjust. If 30% of the population conserves energy, the price of fuel drops, and the other 70% start consuming more. Youve done a lot of work and accomplished nothing.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

My point is not to be discouraging. We really can solve this, and we are solving it. But the methods you've outlined here aren't going to cut it.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

We need to do something, but we need to avoid thinking that anything we do is something that will make a difference. If we don't seriously think about what precisely to do, we're like ants all pulling in different directions. We might get something done, but it'll be a lot of work, and we might also not get anything done.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden You seem to have missed the fact that three of the four points are about system change, and only one, the last, of them is about personal change.

Your argument is very similar to the argument “it doesn’t matter if I own shares in a company that does bad things, because if I sell, someone else will buy the shares because they were cheap”. The argument is flawed. From an economics point of view, the *point* is that it becomes cheaper and therefore less attractive.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden Cheaper is more attractive for commodities. You can’t low-ball your way out of car culture.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden “Less attractive” is for the producer.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

I think oil producers at this point just want to keep making money. If prices drop they can always cut production. What they don't want is stranded assets. They don't want a shift so great that it decimates their business suddenly.

That shift is coming regardless, though. Me switching to an electric car (minimal benefit) or moving to a city (much more benefit) will not even make a dent in that.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

But e.g. in the height of the pandemic all the airlines continued to fly empty planes so that they wouldn't lose slots at airports. That's what we're up against. Empty planes.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden Well, I don’t know about you, but I’ll take it as a win if oil producers cut production. That’s exactly what I want them to do.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

The problem is that they will produce as much as they can sell—the reason to slow production is to raise the price, but they don't slow it enough to make a difference. They can't. The variance is in the noise, because most traffic is compulsory.

So the reason I want to stop driving is because I hate driving. It's stressful and unsafe. I'm happy if that makes a tiny difference in the global oil consumption, but the difference isn't enough to fix anything.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden

There are two reasons why I think letting go of this is important. First, just do what makes sense to you. There are lots of good reasons to stop driving. That way you don't feel satisfied. Feeling satisfied is a bad idea, because what you did didn't fix the problem.

Second, when I think of my personal choices as actually mattering, and I see someone who isn't doing the same, I tend to judge them. This creates division, which is counterproductive.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden The problem I see with your line of thinking is that it seems to lead to the condemnation of all nudging in the direction of less air travel, less car travel, less meat consumption, less investments in bad companies. Instead we have people boasting about their highly unnecessary consumption, and we’re not allowed to complain.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden Why do you see this as a problem?

Seriously, being able to complain about others’ behavior doesn’t do much, does it?

If we want to actually solve this problem, we need to do things that address the problem. Complaining about your neighbors’ individual behavior is not such a thing.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 6, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden But boasting to tens of thousands of people that you’re taking completely frivolous plane trips does do much.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden I absolutely don’t have a cure for US people being so US centric.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden Other countries have other problems, but the general flow seems similar. Eg I’m less worried about Geert Wilders becoming minister-president than about Trump, because the system there is less stupid, but the system there still managed to keep Rutte in power for way too long. Why? Probably pretty similar reasons to why the US keeps electing the same kind of leaders.

Magnus Ahltorp Mar 5, 2024

@abhayakara @hosford42 @ErikUden If you concede that protests are effective when they gather popular support, why would you not encourage as many people as possible to participate?

One of the huge causes of inaction is that people feel they are alone, and that the opposition is the majority. A recent study showed that 69% were for a climate income tax, but only a minority thought that other people had answered that.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden Protests seem to have worked well in Germany so I can’t argue against that. There have been some successes in the Netherlands. I think a big factor is that there appears to still be a free press in those countries. There is no free press in the US, so the same conditions don’t apply.

Ted Lemon Mar 5, 2024

@ahltorp @hosford42 @ErikUden Btw, I was in a bit of a stream of consciousness yesterday when I posted all that and I came across as thinking I have all the answers. I don’t. But some answers I’ve seen really do poorly in practice. I’m a bit old, so I’ve been at this for a while. I really don’t want us to keep repeating the same efforts that don’t work.

alex Mar 4, 2024

@ErikUden bookmarked

𝗣𝗠𝗝 ⚫Mar 4, 2024

imagine what humans could have achieved when all the resources spent on killing, deceiving, abusing, enslaving and exploiting others would have been used on building and advancing humanity
man, we would have already been to proxima centauri and back

nanowiz Mar 4, 2024

@ErikUden
longevity is powerful

Jaguarior Jones Mar 5, 2024

sidb Mar 5, 2024

@ErikUden @lisamelton This argument is now outdated for the simple reason that global warming is now plainly 100% certain, not any lower number.

(Of course, it was always mistargeted too. It credited good faith to those using precautionary principle as a pretext for what they really wanted, which was consolidating money and power. I suspect Sagan knew that, but what else could he do?)

barefootliam Mar 5, 2024

@ErikUden this is the wrong argument unfortunately. Spending on the cold war went to line the pockets of weapons manufacturers, just as aid to Israel does today. In turn, the weapons makers gave money to the politicians. Achievement unlocked: Positive feedback loop.

So we need a positive feedback loop for climate change mitigation and prevention, but no-one has one yet.

Edelruth, PBS Passport Holder Mar 5, 2024

Jesus! 1990.

Quarter of a century ago.

How much could we have slowed the needle if governments had acted then: if the US had lead the fight against climate breakdown, then?

titaniumbiscuit Mar 7, 2025

@Edelruth more like 35 years. The 90s are already quite far away. Sobering reminder that I'm getting old... @ErikUden

Edelruth, PBS Passport Holder Mar 7, 2025

@titaniumbiscuit @ErikUden

Oh ye. That whole "early this century" thing, where people are talking about the 2001-2010, and I think they're referencing the 1920-30s.

@ErikUden I swear I end up crying every single time I watch a speech of his now. He is missed greatly.

The demons are no longer content with merely haunting the world. And we are far worse for his lack of a spotlight to shine on them.

Paul McO'Smith III Mar 5, 2024

@ErikUden the core problem here is that whilst the threat from Russia/USSR can easily be made imminent. if we don't protect the border, Russian tanks will be in Berlin in a day.

the problem with Global Warming is that nobody really sees it. in "The West" it hasn't really impacted anyone's lives. water in the taps. food in the supermarket. the dire "warming" warnings don't feel too bad. hell, we even get to keep our beloved ICE cars because "they're more efficient now".

the fact that some people are pedalling like crazy to maintain this myth state is of no consequence. there's always been someone to deal with the sewers, garbage, etc. it's just like that.

until this starts to materially affect the lives of the middle classes in the "west", china, etc. there is no compelling trigger to act.

we're the lobster in the slowly warming pot. it actually feels pretty good right now.

ApaulD Mar 5, 2024

@ErikUden humans are not logical

Kengkohr Mar 5, 2024

@ErikUden Eins will schreiend im Kreis rennen.
So ein Kluger Kopf benennt das Problem und die ökonomische(!) Lösung ganz klar: es gibt keinerlei Gegenargumente: und trotzdem ballern wir so weiter - und verschenken dabei noch zusätzliche Profite.

Wie ich diesen Dreiklang "Das hamwa imma schon so gemacht.", "Das hamwa noch nie so gemacht.", "Da könnt ja jeder kommen." hasse.

Scruffy looking packet herder Mar 6, 2024

@ErikUden The really funny thing about this is at the time he was giving this speech the Dept of Defense was actively treating climate change as a national security issue. As they should.

joël Mar 19, 2024

@ErikUden Did not anticipate the date 😬

Wurzelmann Mar 6, 2025

@ErikUden uff, die Tatsache, dass das von 1990 ist, hittet nochmal hart...