At this point it's clear that we're not hitting the targets of 1.5 or 2.0 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels. It would be difficult to head off even if ecosocialists were magically installed in every world government today, and seeing as we're nowhere close to that, it just ain't happening.
This doesn't mean we throw up our hands and do nothing, but it does mean that the conversation moves into damage mitigation territory (rather than damage prevention). We can't stop the car before it crashes, but there might still be an option of avoiding the brick wall in favor of steering the car into a ditch. Taking big steps (and cutting emissions in half by 2030 would be a big step) to avoid even worse climate change outcomes is firmly in critical support territory.
I don't trust the capitalists to even mitigate damage. Or rather, their 'damage mitigation' will probably take the form of Fortress America-type plans, along with accounting gimmicks and an expansion of the police state to make sure the unfortunates are silenced with brutal efficiency. Yes, cutting emissions in half by 2030 would be better than throwing up one's hands and doing nothing, but I have almost no faith in the government to achieve even this modest goal. If you can find optimism in such a future, I am glad. But I think it's far more likely that global warming will cause unpredictable cascading problems, and the primary concern of the government will be listening to the exact assholes who are the most guilty of murdering the planet and preserving their ability to do just that.
"Cutting emissions in half by 2030" has the same energy as "tapping the breaks before this car hits a brick wall at 90mph"
deleted by creator
"migrant overflow facilities"
"non resident" instead of "alien"
"Bomb Syria"...wait
deleted by creator
At this point it's clear that we're not hitting the targets of 1.5 or 2.0 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels. It would be difficult to head off even if ecosocialists were magically installed in every world government today, and seeing as we're nowhere close to that, it just ain't happening.
This doesn't mean we throw up our hands and do nothing, but it does mean that the conversation moves into damage mitigation territory (rather than damage prevention). We can't stop the car before it crashes, but there might still be an option of avoiding the brick wall in favor of steering the car into a ditch. Taking big steps (and cutting emissions in half by 2030 would be a big step) to avoid even worse climate change outcomes is firmly in critical support territory.
I don't trust the capitalists to even mitigate damage. Or rather, their 'damage mitigation' will probably take the form of Fortress America-type plans, along with accounting gimmicks and an expansion of the police state to make sure the unfortunates are silenced with brutal efficiency. Yes, cutting emissions in half by 2030 would be better than throwing up one's hands and doing nothing, but I have almost no faith in the government to achieve even this modest goal. If you can find optimism in such a future, I am glad. But I think it's far more likely that global warming will cause unpredictable cascading problems, and the primary concern of the government will be listening to the exact assholes who are the most guilty of murdering the planet and preserving their ability to do just that.