BREAKING: simultaneous freakish heat in the Arctic and Antarctic described as 'impossible' and 'unthinkable' by scientists as abrupt climate change accelerates wildly 🧵 pic.twitter.com/jGwovCRLeT— Ben See (@ClimateBen) March 19, 2022
Global powers may try not empowering extractive companies and comprador elites if they wish tô protect forests instead of invading countries
Global powers are the extractive companies. At least in the imperial core, they're all but one and the same. I don't want anyone anywhere to get hurt, at all. But the global south is suffering right now from climate change, on top of all the other legacies of imperialism and colonialism. If it takes them arming themselves and forcing global north governments to comply in order to protect their own people, so be it.
Yes, I left the foe vague because it is fucking everyone that aligns with and is under the thumb of American capital.
Ecofascism is allowing the poor to die while the rich are comfortable. This is what the status quo is doing. I am suggesting that someone might see intervention (there are many types) as the only viable option to make a change and disrupt the current trajectory and actually make a difference to cut extraction and environmental ruin in a timescale that is meaningful.
I think you misinterpreted me a little, I am not suggesting that China carpet bomb Rio de Janeiro.
What I do mean though, is that capitalist nations, through neoliberal imperialism, are the most extractive countries, and direct this extraction with global companies and supported through the local governments.
Other than complete destruction of a liveable earth, there is no motivation by these actors to change the status quo. It's serves them well.
China is in a unique position, as a powerhouse country that has a political will that is unburdened at least some extent from capitalist interference. They also are one of the few countries that sees long term. If they see a threat to their people, or sovereignty, or food supplies, or water, because of the deforestation or pollution from another country (sure, Brazil is a great example), do they mount action to overthrow a government and replace with a more environmentally friendly option?
I don't necessarily mean military conflict. but sanctions are war, supporting an internal revolt is suitable, cutting off trade routes -- if there is a need to protect the people in china (and also everywhere....) From total global food system collapse -- is violence justified?
I'm not suggesting eco fascism -- like, they're not demonizing a race or something, it would literally be going after capitalists and polluters.
China is the example because of the powerful position they are currently in.
deleted by creator
Global powers are the extractive companies. At least in the imperial core, they're all but one and the same. I don't want anyone anywhere to get hurt, at all. But the global south is suffering right now from climate change, on top of all the other legacies of imperialism and colonialism. If it takes them arming themselves and forcing global north governments to comply in order to protect their own people, so be it.
deleted by creator
Yes, I left the foe vague because it is fucking everyone that aligns with and is under the thumb of American capital.
Ecofascism is allowing the poor to die while the rich are comfortable. This is what the status quo is doing. I am suggesting that someone might see intervention (there are many types) as the only viable option to make a change and disrupt the current trajectory and actually make a difference to cut extraction and environmental ruin in a timescale that is meaningful.
deleted by creator
Yeah, you are correct
I think you misinterpreted me a little, I am not suggesting that China carpet bomb Rio de Janeiro.
What I do mean though, is that capitalist nations, through neoliberal imperialism, are the most extractive countries, and direct this extraction with global companies and supported through the local governments.
Other than complete destruction of a liveable earth, there is no motivation by these actors to change the status quo. It's serves them well.
China is in a unique position, as a powerhouse country that has a political will that is unburdened at least some extent from capitalist interference. They also are one of the few countries that sees long term. If they see a threat to their people, or sovereignty, or food supplies, or water, because of the deforestation or pollution from another country (sure, Brazil is a great example), do they mount action to overthrow a government and replace with a more environmentally friendly option?
I don't necessarily mean military conflict. but sanctions are war, supporting an internal revolt is suitable, cutting off trade routes -- if there is a need to protect the people in china (and also everywhere....) From total global food system collapse -- is violence justified?
I'm not suggesting eco fascism -- like, they're not demonizing a race or something, it would literally be going after capitalists and polluters.
China is the example because of the powerful position they are currently in.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator