I like how they have to refer to thermal satellite imaging and not hard data that shows the outsized contribution to pollution and emissions that western countries share more than 50% of the blame for when calculated from the 1700s.
The title is sensationalised. The finding is only about one aspect of pollution: methane leaks from the ground. From skimming the article it doesn't look like the study claims to be anything more than that.
But who is ultimately responsible? Is it those who dug it up and sold it? Those who bought and traded it? Those who shipped it? Or those who used it? Do we include forest fires in the mix? Or burning wood to heat homes? Or those who started rearing cattle?
And from when are they to blame? Does that mean we should all just do nothing now?
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence. Can hardly blame the slaves for doing what slavers forces them to do.
Those who bought and traded it?
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence.
Those who shipped it?
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence.
Or those who used it?
Yes. That'll be the imperialists and labor aristocrats, who insist on their own decadence.
Do we include forest fires in the mix?
Yes. Caused by imperialists, who implemented a the most unsustainable system ever conceived by humankind.
Or burning wood to heat homes?
Yes and no. It's 2024. Except for an insignificant minority and European victims of US imperialism, burning wood to heat homes in the global north is an entirely unnecessary luxury. It's literally what petit bourgeois labor aristocrats do to make their living rooms cosy while the rest of the house is being warmed by perfectly adequate central heating system.
Or those who started rearing cattle?
Yes, well, the petit bourgeois labor aristocrats who insist on whatever method of agriculture and farming that puts meat on their plate three times a day, every day, no matter how unsustainable it is.
It doesn't mean we do nothing, it means we must abolish capitalism.
That's the wrong question but the answer is still yes. Significantly so. It's not even close.
The right question is fourfold,
Who has destroyed the environment and killed half of all species and brought/is bringing the world towards ecological/climate collapse? (Capitalists.)
What compels capitalists towards unsustainability, environmental degradation, and pollution? (The profit motive.)
What has compelled communists towards some environmental harms? (The threat of capitalists and capitalist restoration.)
What compels communists to seek to fix this and every other problem created by capitalists? (Unlike capitalists, who are mindlessly driven by profit, communists begin with the premise, 'I think, therefore I can do other things than mindlessly chase profits.')
I like how they have to refer to thermal satellite imaging and not hard data that shows the outsized contribution to pollution and emissions that western countries share more than 50% of the blame for when calculated from the 1700s.
The title is sensationalised. The finding is only about one aspect of pollution: methane leaks from the ground. From skimming the article it doesn't look like the study claims to be anything more than that.
Yeah, it's kind of the elephant in the room, and the west's been working hard to shift blame to the developing countries.
But who is ultimately responsible? Is it those who dug it up and sold it? Those who bought and traded it? Those who shipped it? Or those who used it? Do we include forest fires in the mix? Or burning wood to heat homes? Or those who started rearing cattle?
And from when are they to blame? Does that mean we should all just do nothing now?
What would be your solution?
Imperialists, i.e. mostly colonial powers.
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence. Can hardly blame the slaves for doing what slavers forces them to do.
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence.
Yes. That'll be the imperialists, who drain the third world for their own decadence.
Yes. That'll be the imperialists and labor aristocrats, who insist on their own decadence.
Yes. Caused by imperialists, who implemented a the most unsustainable system ever conceived by humankind.
Yes and no. It's 2024. Except for an insignificant minority and European victims of US imperialism, burning wood to heat homes in the global north is an entirely unnecessary luxury. It's literally what petit bourgeois labor aristocrats do to make their living rooms cosy while the rest of the house is being warmed by perfectly adequate central heating system.
Yes, well, the petit bourgeois labor aristocrats who insist on whatever method of agriculture and farming that puts meat on their plate three times a day, every day, no matter how unsustainable it is.
It doesn't mean we do nothing, it means we must abolish capitalism.
The solution is communism.
Do communist countries pollute less?
That's the wrong question but the answer is still yes. Significantly so. It's not even close.
The right question is fourfold,
Who has destroyed the environment and killed half of all species and brought/is bringing the world towards ecological/climate collapse? (Capitalists.)
What compels capitalists towards unsustainability, environmental degradation, and pollution? (The profit motive.)
What has compelled communists towards some environmental harms? (The threat of capitalists and capitalist restoration.)
What compels communists to seek to fix this and every other problem created by capitalists? (Unlike capitalists, who are mindlessly driven by profit, communists begin with the premise, 'I think, therefore I can do other things than mindlessly chase profits.')
China, in 2023 alone, installed more solar capacity than the US has ever done in its entire history.
Centralized socialist control of resources under a planned economy