Newfie wrote:Ibon,
The essentials of your argument were sort of portrayed in the Star Trek - Borg episodes, no?
Ibon wrote:All we have done is given the stupidity of the masses a voice and have elevated it through the internet so that learned science and philosophy no longer is relevant and can not compete with the mediocrity that has replaced it.
Our system – characterised by perpetual economic growth on a planet that is not growing – will inevitably implode.
The only question is whether the transformation is planned or unplanned. Our task is to ensure it is planned, and fast.
We need to conceive and build a new system based on the principle that every generation, everywhere has an equal right to enjoy natural wealth.
This is less daunting than we might imagine. As Erica Chenoweth’s historical research reveals, for a peaceful mass movement to succeed, a maximum of 3.5% of the population needs to mobilise.
Ibon wrote:Newfie wrote:Ibon wrote:Newfie wrote:
I keep harping on the difference between Consumerisim and Capitalisim because it is crucial to understanding our path forward.
.
I think this distinction you have been drawing is important actually. The pressures of constraining resources may result in a decoupling of sorts between the culture of consumption and the basic bones of the economic system of capitalism. ?? Yeah, I can imagine....
Thanks for that. I know I’m pitching a hard sell but I’m convienced I’m into something. It does require taking a different world view.
Newfie, I found your brother..... Watch this!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GX6a2W ... kdXtQbLX3E
Newfie wrote:KJ,
Who are you talking to?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada wrote:I think the pro-collectivism folks on this thread have the title inversed. What they really mean is "We Use Climate Change as the rationale for Ending Capitalism!"
The truth is, France as much as they are a blended socialist/capitalist nation showed the way to get carbon out of the energy system three decades ago when they went Nuclear baseload. If we had a lock of sense everyone who is on the climate change is a bad idea bandwagon would be screaming for everyone else to follow the lead of France rather than pouring ever more money down the expensive and low efficiency renewable drain...er Dream! Renewable Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it is not only the best choice, but the only choice.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
onlooker wrote:I was instinctively against nuclear (hyped fear) and due to "our" corrupt and bumbling ways. But upon hearing the detailed and knowlegable contributions of especially Tanada, I am persuaded that Nuclear should and must be part of the eventual replacement for FF.
Yonnipun wrote:onlooker wrote:I was instinctively against nuclear (hyped fear) and due to "our" corrupt and bumbling ways. But upon hearing the detailed and knowlegable contributions of especially Tanada, I am persuaded that Nuclear should and must be part of the eventual replacement for FF.
Basically man-made concrete buildings could last only a couple of hundreds of years but the nuclear waste stays radioactive for millions of years. Is not there a contradiction? For example who is going to built a new sarcophage for chernobl when the oil age is over ?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Return to Environment, Weather & Climate
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests