• PhaseFour [he/him]
    1·
    4 years ago

    Green New Deal would increase mineral extraction by 150%.

    Mineral extraction accounts for 50% of our CO2 emissions right now.

    The only solution to climate change is to reduce energy consumption. This can not happen under capitalism.

    Advocates for the Green New Deal need to recognize they are not fighting for climate action. They are fighting an economic dispute between mineral & oil extraction companies.

      • PhaseFour [he/him]
        6·
        4 years ago

        The primary objective is to end global supply chains and localize production.

        In the Global North, labor needs to be directed away from service work. In the Global South, labor must be directed away from export commodity production. Across the globe, labor must be directed towards the development of local means of production.

        The Green New Deal is the "climate plan" that will much more exploitative towards the Global South. It's just an advertising campaign for mineral extraction.

          • PhaseFour [he/him]
            2·
            4 years ago

            So, feudalism is not a specific set of class relations? It's actually "when I can't buy Gautamalan bananas at Walmart"?

              • PhaseFour [he/him]
                2·
                4 years ago

                Your argument here is that we need to fundamentally abandon all industrial production

                Literally never said this? Industry can exist without the global supply chains which exist today.

                it’s that it needs a fucking lot of uncompensated labor to work

                Why must the labor be uncompensated? You are presupposing class relations again

                it historically pushes extremely hard towards the enserfment of labor

                What historical example are you using? Every socialist government has carried out the "abolish international commodity production and develop local mean of production." Cuba serves as the perfect example, given their historical role as a plantation & oil economy for the US.

        • MotherOfZachHill [she/her]
          ·
          4 years ago

          labor must be directed towards the development of local means of production

          Jacobin socialists: "actually it's impossible for proles to build anything, people are worthless and must beg Walmart to build things"

    • Wheaties [she/her]
      3·
      4 years ago

      I feel like nuclear energy is getting overlooked. Modern advances allow for re-enriching waste material, so it can be reintroduced into the reaction. With careful construction and planning, it's the safest, greenest, most efficient energy source we have. And it requires no new research. The tech already exists. Widespread standardization and adoption could give us the breathing room necessary to halt any more permanent warming without sacrificing living standards for most of the world. Hell, if we can force developed nations to foot the bill, it could even raise living standards in underdeveloped and exploited nations.

      • MotherOfZachHill [she/her]
        2·
        4 years ago

        With careful construction and planning, it’s the safest, greenest,

        "you can build them wherever you want as long as its the middle of nowhere" not relevant considered the power infrastructure

        • dallasw
          2·
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

        • Wheaties [she/her]
          ·
          4 years ago

          Modern reactors are designed with fail safely features that make a runaway reaction physically impossible. You can plonk one down in the middle of an urban center, if you like.

    • MotherOfZachHill [she/her]
      ·
      4 years ago

      The only solution to climate change is to reduce energy consumption. This can not happen under capitalism.

      Socialists extracting resources is woke

      • PhaseFour [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        A serious reduction in our energy consumption is probably unavoidably gonna result in a serious reduction in human population

        No it literally isn't.

        Most energy consumed in the world goes toward global commodity production for profit. It is not consumed in a rational way to maintain human life.

        Energy consumption can drop dramatically while maintaining high standards of living for the masses.

      • MotherOfZachHill [she/her]
        1·
        4 years ago

        your actual answer is just completely reversing human technological development

        Which technological development is that by the way? "you know, the thing"

        1st world labor aristocrats oppose degrowth because they know in their heart who benefits from imperialism