[KaiserJeep]

Which is absolutely worthless. It matters not what you think, only what you do.

I happen to think that the fact that profits can now be made on renewables, greater than on FF's, is a crucial first step, and something that will save us more than all the useless Greenie gum flapping.

Capitalism is real. The fantasies of Marx and Engels may have had some partial relevance in the 19th century (or maybe none) but they are completely without any relevance in the 21st century world, which has diverged so far from what Marx and Engels knew, that their "insights" are today totally useless, along with their economic theories.

[KaiserJeep]

I guess you either believe in renewable energies, and believe in energy conservation, or you spend your time ridiculing those who do.

That last seems a pretty worthless way to pass the time. If you have any actual insights, then share them. You can abandon the phoney patois, we know you have at least an average vocabulary.

I will simply note that every slum I have ever seen or heard about, is occupied by "people of color". Certainly there are such people living in the toney Silicon Valley suburb in which I live - a full spectrum of skin tones, in fact. The only difference that I have noted is that the people of color are less tolerant of the homeless encampment in the county park next to our neighborhood. They speak out in the Homeowner meetings and condemn those that have less than the above average income needed to live here, and so have moved into tents.

Which is just another confirmation of something I first noted in my teens, and have only observed confirmation of since. That would be that the most racist people I know are "people of color".

[radon1]

What does it all have to do with Marx and Engels? Marx surely had no objections against renewables, whether developed by capitalists or else.

Otherwise great OP.

[KaiserJeep]

What does it all have to do with Marx and Engels? Marx surely had no objections against renewables, whether developed by capitalists or else.

Otherwise great OP.

There are two posts in the thread by members who are for all practical standards, rabid Marxists. We have tangled before, and they blame Capitalism for everything wrong in the world, and prescribe a Marxist economy as a solution to such problems. Then I point out that Marxism or Communism or Socialism has never worked for more than about 4-5 decades without being replaced or modified, and they get petulant and start tossing insults. I was trying to head off such childish behavior, which may not be possible now.

Of course, we are 7.3 billion strong now, and a few decades ago, this would have been celebrated as the triumph of civilization. Today it is a Malthusian disaster, and the two human inventions that may possibly save us are Technology and Capitalism. But these two would rather wallow in Doom than think about surviving.

[ralfy]

To recap, the argument is that capitalism will save the planet from problems caused by capitalism. That is, the system requires continuous growth, especially given competition and the use of money. Investors in renewable energy will require increasing returns on their investment, which means increasing energy use. That in turn requires more material resources not just for RE components but also for infrastructure and consumer goods.

As pointed out in another thread, developed economies make up a minority and depend heavily on service industries, which includes financing. That means ever-increasing levels of credit are needed for more investments, and more created through higher returns on investment. That can only happen through increasing energy and material resource use for developing countries, which in turn can only reach the stage of post-industrialization through industrialization.

That level of global industrialization, even if it involves the use RE and credit creation, will require several planets' worth of resources.

[onlooker]

To me the OP title is an oxymoron. Capitalism is what is destroying the planet thus it cannot save it. All Ralphy stated is so true.

[KaiserJeep]

Both of you fulfilled my expectations in every regard. Both of you doubtless have jobs and support BAU in our Capitalist economy. Both of you enjoy the opportunities and the wealth of the richest large country in the world, and complain about it.

So go live in Cuba, North Korea, or China, or anyplace that still reveres Marx, and see if you like that better.

[Shaved Monkey]

When it comes to "saving the planet" ,its not a matter of liking it better its a matter of which is sustainable
If we all lived like Cubans it would be sustainable.
Sure we like the bling being in a rich capitalist first world nation but its unsustainable.

[KaiserJeep]

But then, there are functional, effective, and working Capitalist economies, and Marxist economies where everybody suffers, starves, and is miserable. That would be the reason Capitalism lives and all the non-functional alternatives die - always.

I mean, we have tried just about everything during the recorded history of our species, and the one alternative that works better, makes more people happier, and will now be implementing alternative energies and (if you are an AGW believer) halting Climate Change, is Capitalism. All the alternatives violate those primate instincts that still sit back in the brain stem, and are at the basis of all human behavior.

If we ever invent a better alternative to Capitalism, it will demonstrate it's superiority when it takes over our increasingly Capitalist society. I'm not holding my breath, and I'm especially not seeking insight from a couple of silly economists from the late 19th century, whose whole life experience and writings are steadily losing relevance in our modern cybernetic society.

[radon1]

Capitalism is not working towards halting Climate Change, it is working towards maximising profits. Always. It may incidentally lead to some environment favourable outcomes here and there, of course. Or capitalists may engage in various non-capitalist activities during the times when they are free from performing their capitalist duties.

And look, Marx has nothing to do with this matter. He did not even comment anything in particular on the environment, to my knowledge. The man was absolute genius and this is recognised even by his opponents, even if he was not always 100% correct.

It increasingly looks like you have a general phobia towards continental Europeans with a big beard.

[Cog]

When it comes to "saving the planet" ,its not a matter of liking it better its a matter of which is sustainable
If we all lived like Cubans it would be sustainable.
Sure we like the bling being in a rich capitalist first world nation but its unsustainable.

Move there now and enjoy Cuba. Lets us know how glorious the worker's paradise is. Do not deprive yourself one moment longer.

[KaiserJeep]

Capitalism is not working towards halting Climate Change, it is working towards maximising profits. Always. It may incidentally lead to some environment favourable outcomes here and there, of course. Or capitalists may engage in various non-capitalist activities during the times when they are free from performing their capitalist duties.

No, Capitalism is working towards happiness for the practitioner, because it rewards natural primate instincts.

And look, Marx has nothing to do with this matter. He did not even comment anything in particular on the environment, to my knowledge. The man was absolute genius and this is recognised even by his opponents, even if he was not always 100% correct.

It increasingly looks like you have a general phobia towards continental Europeans with a big beard.

Don't actually know much about Marx, do you?

Karl Marx was a German philosopher, economist, sociologist, journalist, and revolutionary socialist. Born in Prussia to a middle-class family, he later studied political economy and Hegelian philosophy.
-- Wikipedia

He was an intellectual, a revolutionary, and a writer. He sponged a living off of Engels, whose family owned a business and were in fact, Capitalists. Marx expressed everything as the struggle between classes, which had a limited validity in the 19th century when we still had actual social classes. When rampant Democracy produced a huge and prosperous Middle Class in the early 20th Century, his works and his philosophical musings became obsolete. In the modern world, the only ones who admire him are the "academics", those who teach rather than do, and who fill young minds with foolish twaddle.

In the modern world, following the last and most change-intensive phase of the Industrial Revolution, with medicine, mechanized farming, digital technology, a world-wide information network, etc. etc. etc. - we are so far removed from the world Marx knew in the second half of the 19th Century, that his writings are reduced to the status of mere historical documents, useful for understanding that period, but of no relevance to mankind today.

Think about it. Forget what those useless academia nuts taught you, because they never even were functional outside of their sheltered world.

[Lore]

When it comes to "saving the planet" ,its not a matter of liking it better its a matter of which is sustainable
If we all lived like Cubans it would be sustainable.
Sure we like the bling being in a rich capitalist first world nation but its unsustainable.

In another 50 years our and everyone else's thoughts will be about sustainability. That is sustaining their lives. It won't be modern capitalism as we now practice it as we begin to tumble back into bartering for what we need, not what we want. Most of the isms will be circling the toilet bowl by that time as well.

[onlooker]

Wrong Kaiser. Marx and his writing are still relevant. Why? Because they point to a world whereby mankind lives above his selfish interests and unites for a common goal and destiny. Nothing could be more relevant. We had our chance at a world of selfish pursuits and goals. It produced a deeply divided planet of injustice and inequality. It also produced in the economic sphere a economic model Capitalism which embodies selfish pursuits and in doing so has bought us to this grim point. You say we in rich countries were either too ignorant or too selfish and spineless to transition to Renewable. Okay, but then do not defend Capitalism because that is the logical outcome. Free choice, capitalists love that. No interference by the Govt , again love that. So, everything went as planned with Capitalism, people in rich countries exercised their economic liberties under Capitalism. Peak oil is also about Capitalism thrusting upon the planet this fabulous rich energy source and in the process devastating this planet. Again it all went as planned. Oil companies selling their oil to willing consumers. Nothing wrong with that Kaiser uh. So at this late stage you say, well stupid selfish rich world consumers did what consumers do under Capitalism used their wallet for their own self-interest. What is missing is humanity uniting for the common concern of a livable planet. Capitalism stymied that, people live for themselves not for some common shared purpose or with foresight as people in rich countries are now consumer zombies buying because they know no other way. Thank your Capitalism for making many in rich countries consumer machines. But please do not criticize us for playing our role in your Capitalistic nirvana because then you are what you espouse to hate, a Hypocrite.

[radon1]

No, Capitalism is working towards happiness for the practitioner, because it rewards natural primate instincts.

This is one way to look on what "profit" actually is. But what does this have to do with halting the climate change?

He was an intellectual, a revolutionary, and a writer. He sponged a living off of Engels, whose family owned a business and were in fact, Capitalists. Marx expressed everything as the struggle between classes, which had a limited validity in the 19th century when we still had actual social classes.

How does this relate to the environmental issues?

Why bother with the confusing reference to the climate issues, I have much simpler argumentation for you: See - the sky is blue and grass is green. This certainly means that capitalism is a gift from heaven and Marx is an obsolete idiot.

[KaiserJeep]

Capitalism works because it is the formalized embodiment of basic primate instincts. These include the priority to feed and warm and clothe one's self and family above all others. Marx would have us replace these innate and irreplaceable instincts with intellectual concepts concerning the human species as a whole. He in fact never mentioned a living planet, never discussed the welfare of other species, or ecology, or even humanity uniting for any goals whatsoever. Those are all modern extensions of an already broken philosophy, made by those who never understood that Marx and Engels were bums - they could not even feed themselves in a world of relative plenty caused by the Industrial Revolution. Instead they sponged off the Family Engels working Capitalist relatives.

Capitalism is also the only form of government/economic system that has any staying power whatsoever, because it does not ask anybody to behave differently from how they wish to behave. As I said before, alternative energies, EVs, organic local foods, and ecological concerns have existed for decades, and have never made any traction with humans because they go against those instincts that tell us to feed and clothe and warm and care for ourselves and our children, and let all those others die if necessary to achieve those goals of preservation of self and family.

Well now Capitalism will be behind renewable energy, which it never was before. The difference is that now renewables are more profitable than ever before, more profitable than Fossil Fuel energy, and therefore will be chosen by humans as part of enlightened self-interest. This condition has not existed before, as late as a decade ago, oil and coal were energy bargains.

Nor does Capitalism require constant growth or constant market expansion. Capitalism combined with Technology is an environment that rewards efficiency. I remember a time when automobiles got 8-10 mpg and gas cost less than $0.25 per gallon, and nobody cared. Today, gas is $2.50 per gallon and has been $5.65 in recent years - and you can buy cars that get 60+ mpg and those that can be powered by solar electricity, never consuming any oil except that needed to fabricate the vehicle. Capitalism will thrive in modern industrialized countries with slowly falling populations - and those in countries without technology will simply die. As cruel as it sounds, Donald Trump's wall is necessary to sort out those who have a chance to live from those who will die.

It was not after all, the greed of those who own the means of production that caused all the damage you whine about. They are few and entirely dependant upon masses of consumers like YOU, the true planet killers. One more time, the consumers decide everything by what and how much they consume - the owners of the means of production live or die based on how well they anticipate and satisfy demand for food, for energy, and for goods.

If you want to wait for the bogus "insights" of Marx and Engels to become relevant and true, you will wait forever and die in disappointment, as have however many generations of humans since they themselves died. You don't have to wait any more for Capitalism to embrace renewable energy, that is the very topic of this thread.

Human nature and human instincts and human behavior do not change any faster than the slow progress of evolution - which is why we still have so many behaviors in common with other species of plains apes in Africa, although our species diverged from theirs literally millions of years ago. The fascination with and the exploitation of cheap fossil fuel energy came about by the same forces that will now retire those power sources. Those same forces that make it possible for 7.3+ billion humans to live. But the decline of human numbers will not happen by anybody's plan or by bogus philosophy from rightfully obscure 19th century economists. It will happen because the Capitalist consumers will make entirely selfish choices, for reasons all their own. What is different today is that renewable energies are becoming better choices than Fossil Fuels.

That is big news, indeed it is.

[onlooker]

The selfish instincts you talk about have always been wisely tempered by group dynamics and our evolving culture. If not we would have never progressed as much as we have without this cooperation. Marx is not talking about any esoteric intellectual concepts, he was talking about how the owners of the means of production would inevitably create a top tier wealthy class that would seek to exploit the under classes. This is exactly what has transpired. He also said that the workers or the exploited had to rise to take back ownership of the wealth ie. the resources of the planet and the means to exploit them. That it should be done in a collective manner and with an understanding of why it was done and to what end. The end being to create a relatively classless society whereby all would have a stake and thus all would unite in their common interest. We all have had a common interest to protect this planet and its viability and vitality. It is precisely selfishness as expressed in the ecological principle of the Tragedy of the Commons which has doomed this common interest. People seeing their own selfish interest and not protecting or sharing the planet for the sake of everyone ie. the common good. The staying power of Capitalism has been achieved by ruthless means and yes by the will of those with selfish aims and intentions. It appeals to the lowest parts of a person thus its outcomes reflect this survival of the fittest, dog eat dog mentality. The outcomes rendering the world as extremely unequal and unjust. And so now you casually say let the poor and backward peoples of the world die because it is necessary. I understand we have reached the inevitable destination that Capitalism was going to lead us too. Some must die so others will live. That does sound like a plan to me. The plan being those with money live and those without die. The true planet killers and people killers are those with these type of thoughts. They have led us down this road. And now despite what you may think Kaiser, the privileged of the rich countries will not escape the fate of the exploited and marginalized, the innocent and guilty together will perish in the altar of a warming planet.

[KaiserJeep]

You obviously either did not understand or did not agree with my point about human instincts changing at the speed of evolution.

Human culture is local only, but it is a potent force - and all over the map. Americans, Zunis, and Eskimos all have distinct cultures, and these cultures are in flux at all times - but they do not dominate instincts. If you disagree, name a human culture where the interests of the species dominates that of families. Because I do not think any exist.

Certainly there are exceptional individuals which work for the betterment of mankind - the world has the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa, some of the Catholic popes, etc. etc. But the culture which sets the welfare of humanity above the individual does not exist, has never existed, and won't exist in the near future.

In some distant future, I could see human instincts evolving to that point. But those being would be as far removed from modern humans as we are removed from Australopithecus afarensis - meaning Lucy, the 3.2 million year old primate skeleton believed to be our first differentiated primate ancestor.

So don't go holding your breath, is my advice. Because today's humans behave just like those Cro-Magnons who took advantage of a cave shortage in the last Ice Age to freeze out the Neanderthals and the Denisovans.

Best make your peace with Capitalism, too. Because it isn't going away, and the fantasies of Marx and Engels will never even arrive.

[onlooker]

Human instincts are powerful of that I agree with you. Evolution is slow, that I also agree. What I think you may not understand it that unlike animals who are subservient to our instincts, we are not. We can think and rationalize and thus override our instincts. We can chose higher virtues over primitive urges. It is true that is has not been common in our history but they're are examples. The American Indians had a culture which integrated family values with tribal values. The Spartans of Ancient Greece, had a warrior like culture that had a strong sense of responsibility and self-sacrifice. The point being that Culture is what allows for humans to unite in specific ways that may or may not emphasize selfish primitive urges. Or that may emphasize cooperation over competition. Culture can encapsulate a family and also a country. Thus you have Capitalism as a mode of culture that encourages these primitive reactions and that is so pervasive now in the US. In other poorer countries you will see something different, you will see people helping others even non family members as witnessed by reactions to Natural disasters. So, the manner in which humans seek to organize and run their affairs to a large degree determines the group dynamic of that group of humans. I know you would probably disagree but I believe we are capable of transcending our primitive nature and evolving into beings with a more refined intellect and a more virtuous and benevolent nature towards each other and towards Nature.

[Shaved Monkey]

When it comes to "saving the planet" ,its not a matter of liking it better its a matter of which is sustainable
If we all lived like Cubans it would be sustainable.
Sure we like the bling being in a rich capitalist first world nation but its unsustainable.

Move there now and enjoy Cuba. Lets us know how glorious the worker's paradise is. Do not deprive yourself one moment longer.

You miss the point,by miles.
http://www.dailyimpact.net/2015/02/09/t ... what-cuba/
We have no choice,we are just lucky in a blimp of time to have some sparkly bling, by chasing it we are sending our grand children to hell.