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
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.
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