D
dvdjs
Guest
Actually, that was @Regular_Atheist, not the climate change political movement.
- Status
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You are asking too much. All that is needed is people in the movement who are not socialists. I will start with Greta herself. Then there are the hundreds of thousands who rallied in Melbourne, Sydney and other cities in Australia. There are the 100,000 estimated that turned out to protest in Berlin. I could go on. But what is missing from your argument is any solid connection between socialism, that is the means of production for the economy in general should be owned by the government and not privately held.LeafByNiggle:
Okay, so they are the only two supporting an end to capitalism and the Green New Deal.
Can you name someone from that movement who says that capitalism is the solution?
I am asking too much. Let me rephrase: can you identify a statement by someone that capitalism is the solution to man made climate change?JonNC:
You are asking too much. All that is needed is people in the movement who are not socialists. I will start with Greta herself. Then there are the hundreds of thousands who rallied in Melbourne, Sydney and other cities in Australia. There are the 100,000 estimated that turned out to protest in Berlin. I could go on. But what is missing from your argument is any solid connection between socialism, that is the means of production for the economy in general should be owned by the government and not privately held.LeafByNiggle:
Okay, so they are the only two supporting an end to capitalism and the Green New Deal.
Can you name someone from that movement who says that capitalism is the solution?
I can: Capitalism Is the Key to Fixing Climate Change – Reason.com
Do you agree with @Regular_Atheist ?
D
dvdjs
Guest
My answer is in post#13
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I didn’t say I couldn’t find anyone who says capitalism is the answer. I only meant that it was not necessary to find such a person to refute the argument that the whole climate change protest movement is a socialist front.
But now that you have done the work for me and found this article, I can only say yes, go ahead and read it. I wholeheartedly agree with it. But did you read it? It seems to argue against your position.
The author extols the virtues of properly incentivising capitalism by putting a price on environmental harm - in particular, climate change - through judicious regulations. That might mean putting a tax on carbon emissions, or setting economy standards, or other such means. It is worth noting that many companies are taking steps on the their own to combat climate change, not because of government regulations, but just for the business benefit of good public relations. In this instance public pressure is leading government action. But in a way, government action is just another way in which the public expresses their will to have this issue addressed.
I must point out one important difference between climate change and previous environmental problems, and that is the issue of time scale. In the case of sulfur emissions from power plants, for example, the time lag from the switch to low-sulfur coal and the installation of scrubbers in power plants to the reduction of acid rain was a matter of a few years. And the recovery of the downwind lakes and forests followed a few years after that. The whole problem was essentially dealt with and beneficial effects realized in several decades. In similar problems the effect was similarly short. The Cuyahoga River no longer burns from oily pollution. Lake Erie has essentially recovered - all within one generation. The slowest reacting problem may have been the ozone layer. But even that has returned to near pre-freon levels in less than one person’s lifetime. Problem solved - by capitalism.
Climate change is not like that. It has a time lag of multiple generations. It has taken 150 years or so to develop. Unlike freon, which was produced and used by only a few big companies, burning fossil fuels is everywhere and is very slow to change. And after it does change, the benefits will not be seen for perhaps a lifetime. That means if we wait until the effects are at their peak, the inertia of the atmosphere and the global climate system, not to mention the social inertia, will make the world coast way beyond what we are experiencing at the time we decide to take action. That is why proactive steps of some sort need to be taken before that point if we hope to avoid generations of unnecessary suffering in the decades to come. Capitalism can still be the answer, but only if it is properly incentivized.
And yet much of it is.
I agree with good swaths of it. I think government has a role to play.
T
Theo520
Guest
Russia wasn’t capitalist but they committed some of the worst environment atrocities. The only solution that meets your objective is depopulation.
Even without what you are calling “capitalism” the forests will still but cut for shelter, furniture, and heating.
G
Guinness
Guest
She also has significant behavioral, emotional, and developmental disorders. Putting her out there like this is child abuse.
Z
Zzyzx_Road
Guest
I wouldn’t go that far, but she does have issues. I keep thinking there must be far better spoken teenage proponents than this one. Why did they trot this one out there?
G
Guinness
Guest
You wouldn’t call Asperger’s, OCD, mutism, and eating disorders so severe that they’ve stunted her growth (according to her) significant?
Z
Zzyzx_Road
Guest
I should have been more specific: I was speaking of child abuse. I’ve seen real abuse and this isn’t it.
G
Guinness
Guest
You don’t think using a young woman with significant disabilities as a sock puppet and human shield is abusive?
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
She is justifiably angry with the inaction, as are many others in her generation. And there is no reason to think her actions are anything but her sincere choice. Anything else would be pure speculation.Pai_Nosso:
She also has significant behavioral, emotional, and developmental disorders. Putting her out there like this is child abuse.
Did you ever see pictures of celebrities on the front of the supermarket tabloids? By careful selection of a moment in time, they can make anyone look hilarious. I would not take too much from such a snapshot.
Last edited:
G
Guinness
Guest
She has discussed her autism, depression, OCD, and how an eating disorder led to stunted growth. It’s not speculation. I don’t doubt she believes what she’s saying, but that’s not really relevant. Any number of equally photogenic and articulate people could have stood up and espoused the same points, but the climate alarmists chose to use an emotionally and developmentally disabled child to hide behind, which is what I find objectionable.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
None of the things you mention support the claim that her actions were not her sincere choice, which is all I was claiming.LeafByNiggle:
She has discussed her autism, depression, OCD, and how an eating disorder led to stunted growth. It’s not speculation.
Not relevant to what? I thought the question was whether she did this on her own initiative or was manipulated by adults, in which her believing in her choice is certainly relevant.
There is no proof that her actions were the result of being “chosen” by some group you don’t like. Those other “equally photogenic and articulate people” are also standing up and speaking. Greta is not the only one. She is just the one who went to great lengths to make her case. That is primarily why we know of her - because of her ocean crossing on a sailboat. Your charges of being manipulated by others are unfounded. Others may seek to take advantage of her notoriety, but that is on them, not on Greta.
R
Regular_Atheist
Guest
I mean communism. And, no, Greta Thurnberg and the capitalists and NGOs that created her image do not want to do away with capitalism.
Z
Zzyzx_Road
Guest
The communists and the socialists are well known for their use of human shields. Not only in war, but in more civilized circumstances as well. This young lady is being used as a human shield. I wouldn’t call that abusive, but I will say this is classic “making it about the children” paradigm we have seen from time to time that deflects the reasoning they don’t want us to do and the questioning they don’t want to hear about. Her issues are meant to engender sympathy for her and hopefully that sympathy extends unthinkingly to the ideology she is standing in for.
Understand that the usual caterwauling at the rest of us hasn’t worked very well. Yet. So the fever pitch just gets ratcheted higher and higher.
Even Leaf agrees that our demise within a decade might be a tad presumptuous.
Understand that the usual caterwauling at the rest of us hasn’t worked very well. Yet. So the fever pitch just gets ratcheted higher and higher.
Even Leaf agrees that our demise within a decade might be a tad presumptuous.
- Status