Frownland

It's always been pretty popular.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Lisnaholic

Yes, that's true - and on a local scale the damage done to the environment was there to be seen from Day One of the industrial revolution.

Yes, I was scoring a rather petty point there. I think you brought out the literalist in me when you effectively rounded down 15% to zero to suit your argument.

__________________________________________________ ____

In Britain, the UN Report was headline news for all of yesterday's newspapers. Here's a good example:



Amid the alarm, there are some calls for, and even hints of, government action, although, of course, a lot of that outrage will probably disappear by tomorrow.
I use a website that shows me the front page of every major Brit newspaper, so I can report with confidence that not one of them has adopted the Anteater argument, " No point doing anything, because China...", even though, according to his pie chart, Britain is responsible for a mere 1% sliver of global emissions.
The implicit judgement of the British media is that, even at 1% UK versus 30% China, the argument doesn't fly, or, as elphenor puts it:-

__________________________________________

Yes, from my reading of history, it's always been too popular for its own good.

__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

Anteater

Just out of curiosity, would you still be taking this particular stance if they were 70% as opposed to a meager 30%? What if the U.S. was 50% instead of 15%? The general consensus in regards to all these numbers is that the countries that contribute the most to the problem should be taking the initiative in some way to solve the problem moreso than the countries that contribute least. That was the sentiment of the BBC anyway. Other organizations and media outlets have some variation of the same opinion.

And just FYI - regardless of my particular opinion on these subjects, it's pretty much a given that countries like the U.K. are going to try to do what they can to combat this problem. The purpose of that data is to give the international community some idea of priority in regards to who should be doing what. Hence my comment on China's coal use.

__________________
Anteater's 21 Fav Albums Of 2020

Anteater's Daily Tune Roulette

jwb

see that sounds more like revenge/retribution to me than it does trying to really impact the environment

So the morality concerned is different

I can almost see the revenge argument more .. that if we're going down anyway then might as well make them pay for it. But maybe it's just the way i think about morality but i don't think that's necessarily ethically righteous just more so satisfying to the victims. Think death penalty for murderers/rapists etc

Which is of course distinct from the idea that we are actually going to scare people into doing the right thing. You can make an argument for example that the death penalty doesn't work as a deterrence but that doesn't make the revenge any less sweet. So i guess i do relate to the impulse that it would at least be satisfying to watch the elite taken down. Whether it was done by moral or immoral means.

jwb

you're suggesting we are gonna put such a scare into the CCP that they are just gonna run into space? Lol

I never know if you're trolling with this china **** but you must realize all that is gonna happen is another cold war or possibly worse... We are in no position to take on something like that. Especially since we are already in that basic position with Russia and there is a strong possibility that more conflict is coming in the ukraine. We just bailed out of Afghanistan and that country is going right back to the Taliban run terror petri dish that it was in the first place. We failed in Iraq, Syria, Lybia, etc. We already have conflict with China and have limited leverage with even getting them to give us a better trade deal or stop a completely unnecessary genocide... But we are going to scare them into space and save the planet/empire with an army of hacker nerds lol

We're declining as the over extended global super power and if anything China's on the way up. Time to come to terms with that and stop lashing out at our perceived loss in stature.

jwb

imo that's more understandable cause they're just fighting over a single country. That's basically war. Very often one side in a war has slim chances, especially in asymmetric guerilla war.

But the bigger your aim the more fantastical your terror ambitions become and the more you just look like a run of the mill deranged terrorist. I think we have more sympathy for the Palestinians who often feel pressure or even a duty to kill themselves in a suicide attack because their quality of life and sovereignty have been demolished. They are essentially inmates in an open air prison.

Like you could say the same about osama and 9/11.. sure it's drastic measures but now else are they going to spark the conflict that will draw in Muslim fighters and martyrs to fight for the caliphate? From that point of view it makes perfect sense. Terrorism is by its very nature an act of desperation.

Anteater

It's just a likely outcome. People like Bezos and Jack Ma, (along with certain vested interests by the elite in China and the U.S.) investing in and subsequently creating self-sustaining space stations over the next few centuries that float around like miniature cities. If the environment reaches a point beyond a place of no return, the rich will park their asses up there and watch the planet swallow up those who couldn't afford the shuttle ticket.

__________________
Anteater's 21 Fav Albums Of 2020

Anteater's Daily Tune Roulette

Lisnaholic

I'm guessing these "what ifs" are addressed to me, so I'll make a comment if I may.

I don't think your changing numbers would alter my position particularly: my position being that it is a mistake for any country to say that another country "should be taking the initiative in some way". I'm not sure why that is your take-away of "the general consensus". My attitude now, (and since the beginning of this thread) has been about individuals and individual countries cleaning up their own acts. As far as I can tell, the Brit media, the Paris Accord signatories and many posters here take a similar position. I haven't seen much endorsement of your idea that China must act first.

To me, the bold seems to contradict what you said in your first paragraph, Anteater

At last! Something we can agree on!!

__________________
"Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

The Batlord

I mean I'm being ridiculous for the sake of bleak humor but if you're worried about a fascist crackdown then you should realize the fascist crackdown is probably coming either way once climate refugees from South and Central America and even from within this country become ever greater problems we need to deal with.

__________________

Anteater

Not at all. I just assume you understand certain things implicitly so that I don't always have to spell them out. You can, in fact, be tougher on certain countries and also encourage ALL countries to do better at the same time, no?

__________________
Anteater's 21 Fav Albums Of 2020

Anteater's Daily Tune Roulette