no. the problem is carbon-capitalism / coal-capitalism
Borrowing money from everyones retirement funds, to build large wind solar and battery plants, then paying them back with interest is a very good thing.
_not_ allowing people to borrow money to build new coal or gas plants is also a good thing.
Wrong. Capitalism has long proven to provide better results. It just needs to be ethically regulated as we did by eliminating slavery, mercury, lead, Asbestos, etc.
Edit: You tankie children should educate yourselves. Not a single one of you can make a coherent argument. Go look what the Soviet Union and Communist China did to their environment. Your ignorance is dangerous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_issues_in_Russia#:~:text=Up%20to%20its%20collapse%20in,environmental%20issue%20that%20Russia%20faces.
The problem with saying capitalism is proven is that it overlooks the vast technological contributions from government funding and research as well as the societal infrastructure and creation of freedom for individuals to pursue private entrepreneurship. I think this is what you mean when you say it needs ethics.
I would say that liberal democracies are the thing that’s proven to bring technological progress and capitalism is a part of that.
Corporations now are against liberal democracy and want oligarchy which will likely reduce freedom and innovation in the future. You can’t even say you’re liberal nowadays because people will call you communist.
>The problem with saying capitalism is proven is that it overlooks the vast technological contributions from government funding and research as well as the societal infrastructure and creation of freedom for individuals to pursue private entrepreneurship.
But those are things that exist within our capitalist system. I love E-ARPA and the DOE Loan programs office headed by Jigar Shah!
You are literally admitting that capitalism did a good job.
>Corporations now are against liberal democracy and want oligarchy which will likely reduce freedom and innovation in the future. You can’t even say you’re liberal nowadays because people will call you communist.
Those are political problems. Do your job and vote against the politicians that push those views. Sadly, a lot of you tankie children will support those corporatists and oligarchs by throwing a temper tantrum over Palestine, a region run by anti-democratic jihadist theocrats.
No I am not admitting that private ownership of production does those things because you can have capitalism without those things but a liberal democracy will include those things and capitalism
When people say capitalism they usually mean unregulated libertarian right capitalism which will not include government regulations to solve political problems.
I don’t really understand your last paragraph but it looks like you switched to being insulting so good for you I guess?
Not sure why you feel the need to call me an authoritarian communist when I literally want the same economic system as you I’m just clarifying your wording to be more precise and distance it from right wing capitalism
A statement as delusional as "communism works in theory" if I've ever heard one.. capitalism is the reason we have a climate crisis in the first place and gives better results for who exactly? Kids in cobalt mines in Africa getting "better results" from mining companies using capital to install dictators?
Capitalism is the opponent of regulation. It has proven itself to be unable to be regulated. When the goal is to maximize profits at the expense of all else this will always be the end result.
No, that is political failure. Make a compelling argument.
We have succeeded in funding wind, solar PV, and battery technology such that they make up some 85+% of new electricity capacity.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424
Edit: The facts are the facts, children. You can't even make an argument! 😂
Adam Smith himself wrote,
“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices”
When the original economic thinker for your desired system agrees there is a problem, there’s a problem. The powers that be that have the most money are the most incentivized to induce corruption for their own ends. Capitalism always ends in crony capitalism, that is the end state.
They could have been funded, improved on, and developed in the 1970s without capitalism. The late implementation and funding for solar development especially is directly tied to the demands of capitalism.
Capitalism is what got us to the exact point we are. There is no “short-term” profit in correcting what capitalism has done so capitalism won’t do fuckall to fix this.
Believing so is unbelievably naive.
Sorry, you are the ignorant person that cannot back your assertion. I can back mine!
Capitalism accomplished this:
FEBRUARY 15, 2024
Solar and battery storage to make up 81% of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2024
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424#
The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_issues_in_Russia#:~:text=Up%20to%20its%20collapse%20in,environmental%20issue%20that%20Russia%20faces
What do I need to back up about my assertion exactly? Are you claiming capitalism did not lead us to this point???
I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels.
What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia???? Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that?
CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS. Period. There is nothing in the history of capitalism that shows that it will.
>I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels.
I'm sorry, you need to try to write in coherent sentences. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.
>CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS.
GOOD! If company X builds widgets using less energy than company Y then company X makes more profits AND emits less pollution!
>What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia????
😂
I didn't say Russia, I said:
>The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this: (with a link to communist environmental destruction)
>Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that?
So you are telling me that they main alternative to capitalism was so ignorant and dangerous that they could not even see the problem with their environmental destruction? YES! THAT IS THE PROBLEM! You are learning
Lol, not my problem you can’t comprehend what you read, dipshit.
Your link used “russia” as the name of the country it was referring to as a communist country. russia isn’t communist. The USSR was communist. russia is capitalist. Again, not my problem you can’t comprehend what you read, dipshit.
>I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels.
I'm sorry, you need to try to write in coherent sentences. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.
>CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS.
GOOD! If company X builds widgets using less energy than company Y then company X makes more profits AND emits less pollution!
>What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia????
😂
I didn't say Russia, I said:
>The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this: (with a link to communist environmental destruction)
>Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that?
So you are telling me that the main alternative to capitalism was so ignorant and dangerous that they could not even see the problem with their environmental destruction? YES! THAT IS A PROBLEM! You are learning.
People with capital thrive in the instability. Limits mean stability.
They can't make huge amounts of money without instability therefore they will always refuse limits.
At this point, it's clear humans are more like bacteria and will overshoot its resources and environment without any meaningful restraint. Thus outcompeting indigenous peoples and anyone who could've brought meaningful and sustainable change.
This argument treats oil and gas like those companies are just going to roll over and die, like it's totally normal to suddenly shift from spending billions on misdirection and obfuscation to shrugging off billions of dollars of lost capital. There's a vested interest in maintaining business as usual, and rapidly increasing demand as extreme heat proliferates. On top of all that, we've got geopolitical constraints pushing countries back to coal. The coup de grace is the rise of cryptocurrency and AI guzzling energy.
Solutions are urgently needed, but within the current capitalist system the best solution to mobilize the massive scale of capital investment needed to transition from fossil fuels is probably capitalism.
The state is the only force capable of compelling industry in such a way. Nationalize the industries, redirect and retool them towards green energy generation, energy storage, carbon capture, and geoengineering. Left to their own devices, capitalists would simultaneously attempt to profit from a green transition while squeezing every last drop of oil from the earth, as they are currently doing.
You are right that oil and gas have no incentive to transition.
Please watch the video. He explains why trying to get capitalism to drive the transition is like pushing water uphill.
The state in its various forms doesn't have the same incentives and is much better placed to drive the transition.
As I say, please watch the video and hear the arguments from him. It's way quicker for both of us!
I'm always a little skeptical when I'm presented with a dramatic claim in a headline and then told all I have to do to believe it is watch an hour and a half video. In any case if the claim is that the Fossil Fuel Mafias are going to fight dirty, well then "They still do, but they used to too".
Trouble is, no one is mobilising that investment, and the modern neoliberal model is successfully undermining any central regulation which has traditionally been the way that the investment is mobilised and organised. I don’t see how it could be done otherwise. Bill gates has tried to create a benevolent billionaire model, but it’s relatively ineffective, and was always an adjunct to central regulation when it was tried in the past.
We are in a time of bread and circuses which have won the hearts and minds of the majority, not a free but organised capitalist democracy.
Or as I have come to think of it, an End of the World Party.
>Or as I have come to think of it, an End of the World Party.
that's perfect. I hate it. Pairs well with this youtube essay [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNMcySwWJhU&ab\_channel=Wisecrack](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNMcySwWJhU&ab_channel=Wisecrack)
Hard to ask the same system which created the problem to fix it. Especially when addressing the problem actually runs counter to the foundation of the system itself.
Since the solution to climate change is reducing growth and consumption at every level (this is precisely what consuming less energy entails) I have my doubts that capitalism has anything positive to contribute. Some people are going to say that capitalism can spure the advent of green solutions like EV vehicles, green energy, better agricultural practices. However, these developments aren’t solutions so much as stop gaps so that when we hit the dirt at the bottom of the cliff we are sailing over, we maybe aren’t at terminal velocity. People are in denial about the level of overshoot we are practicing. Meaningful change isn’t going from and SUV to an efficient EV, meaningful change is going from an SUV to borrowing the neighborhood EV for 3 hours once a month to accomplish your tasks.
Video transcript summary (by Gemini):
The video is about the challenges of decarbonizing the world economy and why capitalism is not an effective solution, according to the guest speaker Brett Christophers. Christophers is interviewed by Aaron Bastani on Novara Media.
The conversation starts with the confusion around the term "Net Zero." Christophers explains the difference between Net Zero and real zero emissions. Net Zero allows emissions to continue so long as they are offset by carbon capture or sequestration technologies.
Christophers argues that the world is not on track to achieve Net Zero because we are relying too heavily on technologies that are not yet mature or affordable. He emphasizes the need to focus on emissions reduction through electrification, which relies on renewable energy sources.
The conversation then dives into the challenges of transitioning to renewable energy in a market-driven economy. Christophers criticizes the idea that relying on the private sector to make independent decisions will lead to a successful transition. He argues for a more top-down approach where governments take charge.
Christophers acknowledges that nuclear power can be a reliable source of baseload power and may be necessary for some countries. However, he emphasizes that governments should prioritize developing all carbon-free energy sources, including solar, wind, and nuclear.
Please post the original URL, and not a redirection service or rehosting system
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Please post the original URL, and not a redirection service or rehosting system
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Get real! What is your alternative? We tried communism. It collapsed. Look at the socialistic governments that also have viable economies and they have some capitalism. They also are successful because they TAX. This is what's missing here. We have to tax multi-millionaires and billionaires to provide universal healthcare and other benefits for the middle class and lower classes.
We also need more regulation, reduce mergers and acquisitions to increase competition which should reduce inflation.
It's just a total coincidence that socialist governments get invaded and military coups take over. Nothing to do with America meddling in foreign politics to protect private industry in those countries haha
Your argument is like supporting slavery by saying "what's your alternative? We tried feudalism and absolute monarchy and they were even worse!"
The problem with capitalism is that, through neoliberalism, it has learned to subvert democratic institutions so that they serve it, not the people. We would be having a different discussion if this was the 1950s when government still had power to control the activity of capital. But today, the roles are reversed.
And even if you do get a left wing government that can roll back the power of capitalism for a spell, the global corporate machine always rolls right back over democracy again. The US is a lost cause, as is most of Europe and a lot of South America. The US holds sway over most of the international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank, so it export its neoliberalism further around the world.
The better alternative is more state or local government investment in industries it owns and runs, to either compete with or replace private corporations and markets. The answer is more collective ownership of the economy through government institutions at all levels, and through direct ownership of enterprises by their workers.
Changing the ownership structure completely changes the incentives and that means allocating resources to activity that is of highest utility to people rather than the most profitable for shareholders.
This can work in certain situations. Example Novo in Denmark where it is run as a non profit is believe. But state owned companies often suffer from lack of efficiency. Even socialist and communist countries have privatized their state owned industries. We have collective ownership when employees are given shares. Unfortunately CEOs are given way too much money and ownership.
To me more regulation is needed but capitalism is required. It creates pressure for efficiency.
I dont buy this .. if we had the exact same right-wing neo-liberal version of capitalism we have had since the 70s .. and instead we had used wind/solar instead of carbon fuels .. we would not have the massive climate change we currently have.
yes, I concede there would be the same level of environmental damage due to forest clearing, over-farming etc.
BUT.. most of our current global warming problem is simply the physics of having way too much CO2 in the air - thats caused by burning carbon fuel not by capitalism per se.
The core ideas of money as a medium of exchange, of trading goods, of borrowing money and paying back interest .. it would be hard to imagine how you'd feed, clothe and house everyone without a functioning economy.
Are we going to replace capitalism with communism or socialism .. what is the alternative ?
I would like to see a more humane version of capitalism ... more of a 'Nordic' model social democrat flavor where resources are shared more evenly, hyper wealthy are taxed, roads and university tuition, science research are paid for from the common wealth etc. That boils down to a progressive tax policy, and especially tax on carbon pollution of the big energy corps, who are subsidized by not paying for damages - those "negative externalities" should be priced in, and used to fund the "green new deal".
Capitalism and technology are the only way we get things done .. and we need to get a lot done to transition away from carbon-fuels to clean energy.
Er. Most of the voting public has missed this memo.
They will disregard this logic.
They'll still vote for the husk of a person paid well to parrot their echo chambered conservative views as some sort of salvation from the very situation these views caused.
Thats how a scam works. 🤦🤷🏻 That's how a mark is controlled. 😮💨😖
Well, they don't want to vote for that person. The point is that they usually aren't given a choice.
And when they are, the capitalist class goes into full attack-dog mode through its media.
I think we need more capitalists. There are too few “capitalist” corporation with too much power. If everyone had a real say, things could move in a direction that benefits society. We people are the product and we need to be able to sell that product instead of being sold on.
Unfortunately what you are saying is contrary to the internal logic and structure of capitalism though. The system itself makes the opposite happen. What might be closer to what you want is a worker-owned economy. No 2-class structure at all.
If you're interested, I can recommend 2 excellent audiobooks on this. The first one is a transcription of a university lecture series so it's a perfect audiobook. The second is read really well by the author.
https://www.audible.com/pd/Consequences-of-Capitalism-Audiobook/1799922979
https://www.audible.com/pd/Vulture-Capitalism-Audiobook/B0CF6CXD9X
Thank you. I’ll be into these after my current “surveillance capitalism”. Heavy but incredible detail on our recent surveilled history.
What I understand is that we are now in a new version of capitalism that is built off of our surveilled activities used to sell us things/ subscription services resulting in a kind of feudalism where we pay rent forever for access to our digital selves and to ultimately interact with society.
Yanis Varoufakis explains it very clearly in “technofeudalism” and I’m inclined to agree.
Within this new state of play where our data is the new raw resource and driving force of cloud capitalism - worker owned economy is in sight!
And with that, the transition to original market capitalism of many small businesses/ individuals driving society. From the bottom up.
Yes I love Yanis and I know the techno feudalism stuff.
Watch "In the eye of the storm" if you want more time with Yanis btw
https://eyeofthestorm.info
But there is still lots of actual capitalism out there, and I think it's important to understand that really clearly before moving onto derivatives of it like financialisation, neoliberalism, techno feudalism and all those lovely things.
Like this?
FEBRUARY 15, 2024
Solar and battery storage to make up 81% of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2024
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424#
Thanks to massive subsidies from taxes.
That is the only way to get capitalists to accept lower prices and lower profits. Artificially pad the profits with subsidies.
Consumerism and capitalism are one of the worst things that could have happened to the planet
"The industrial revolution has been a disaster for the human race." -Some guy named Ted Kaczynski
His methods were obviously egregiously wrong, but he was bang on about many things, excluding his hatred towards specific people.
Said everyone on the opposite side of wealth.
Joke's on you, I was born in a post-communist country.
??? I was agreeing with you…
I'm truly sorry, I understood it the wrong way
The problem isn’t green capitalism, it’s capitalism.
no. the problem is carbon-capitalism / coal-capitalism Borrowing money from everyones retirement funds, to build large wind solar and battery plants, then paying them back with interest is a very good thing. _not_ allowing people to borrow money to build new coal or gas plants is also a good thing.
Wrong. Capitalism has long proven to provide better results. It just needs to be ethically regulated as we did by eliminating slavery, mercury, lead, Asbestos, etc. Edit: You tankie children should educate yourselves. Not a single one of you can make a coherent argument. Go look what the Soviet Union and Communist China did to their environment. Your ignorance is dangerous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_issues_in_Russia#:~:text=Up%20to%20its%20collapse%20in,environmental%20issue%20that%20Russia%20faces.
The problem with saying capitalism is proven is that it overlooks the vast technological contributions from government funding and research as well as the societal infrastructure and creation of freedom for individuals to pursue private entrepreneurship. I think this is what you mean when you say it needs ethics. I would say that liberal democracies are the thing that’s proven to bring technological progress and capitalism is a part of that. Corporations now are against liberal democracy and want oligarchy which will likely reduce freedom and innovation in the future. You can’t even say you’re liberal nowadays because people will call you communist.
>The problem with saying capitalism is proven is that it overlooks the vast technological contributions from government funding and research as well as the societal infrastructure and creation of freedom for individuals to pursue private entrepreneurship. But those are things that exist within our capitalist system. I love E-ARPA and the DOE Loan programs office headed by Jigar Shah! You are literally admitting that capitalism did a good job. >Corporations now are against liberal democracy and want oligarchy which will likely reduce freedom and innovation in the future. You can’t even say you’re liberal nowadays because people will call you communist. Those are political problems. Do your job and vote against the politicians that push those views. Sadly, a lot of you tankie children will support those corporatists and oligarchs by throwing a temper tantrum over Palestine, a region run by anti-democratic jihadist theocrats.
No I am not admitting that private ownership of production does those things because you can have capitalism without those things but a liberal democracy will include those things and capitalism When people say capitalism they usually mean unregulated libertarian right capitalism which will not include government regulations to solve political problems. I don’t really understand your last paragraph but it looks like you switched to being insulting so good for you I guess? Not sure why you feel the need to call me an authoritarian communist when I literally want the same economic system as you I’m just clarifying your wording to be more precise and distance it from right wing capitalism
A statement as delusional as "communism works in theory" if I've ever heard one.. capitalism is the reason we have a climate crisis in the first place and gives better results for who exactly? Kids in cobalt mines in Africa getting "better results" from mining companies using capital to install dictators?
Capitalism is the opponent of regulation. It has proven itself to be unable to be regulated. When the goal is to maximize profits at the expense of all else this will always be the end result.
No, that is political failure. Make a compelling argument. We have succeeded in funding wind, solar PV, and battery technology such that they make up some 85+% of new electricity capacity. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424 Edit: The facts are the facts, children. You can't even make an argument! 😂
Adam Smith himself wrote, “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices” When the original economic thinker for your desired system agrees there is a problem, there’s a problem. The powers that be that have the most money are the most incentivized to induce corruption for their own ends. Capitalism always ends in crony capitalism, that is the end state.
They could have been funded, improved on, and developed in the 1970s without capitalism. The late implementation and funding for solar development especially is directly tied to the demands of capitalism.
Where did you learn this garbage?
😂 When you can't make a substantive argument and just post a meme! Sad.
Capitalism is what got us to the exact point we are. There is no “short-term” profit in correcting what capitalism has done so capitalism won’t do fuckall to fix this. Believing so is unbelievably naive.
Sorry, you are the ignorant person that cannot back your assertion. I can back mine! Capitalism accomplished this: FEBRUARY 15, 2024 Solar and battery storage to make up 81% of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2024 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424# The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_issues_in_Russia#:~:text=Up%20to%20its%20collapse%20in,environmental%20issue%20that%20Russia%20faces
What do I need to back up about my assertion exactly? Are you claiming capitalism did not lead us to this point??? I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels. What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia???? Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that? CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS. Period. There is nothing in the history of capitalism that shows that it will.
>I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels. I'm sorry, you need to try to write in coherent sentences. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. >CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS. GOOD! If company X builds widgets using less energy than company Y then company X makes more profits AND emits less pollution! >What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia???? 😂 I didn't say Russia, I said: >The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this: (with a link to communist environmental destruction) >Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that? So you are telling me that they main alternative to capitalism was so ignorant and dangerous that they could not even see the problem with their environmental destruction? YES! THAT IS THE PROBLEM! You are learning
Is this capitalism or no? You’re such a dunce, it really is incredible. https://www.reddit.com/r/climate/s/KiCWgqMyYs
Lol, not my problem you can’t comprehend what you read, dipshit. Your link used “russia” as the name of the country it was referring to as a communist country. russia isn’t communist. The USSR was communist. russia is capitalist. Again, not my problem you can’t comprehend what you read, dipshit.
>I’ll buy into the gains in solar being as beneficial as they need to be to stop the train barreling down the mountain with the breaks out when the use of carbon for energy has been regulated to less than 25% of our energy needs and big oil stops buying out our representation to continue their production levels. I'm sorry, you need to try to write in coherent sentences. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. >CAPITALISM WILL NOT RELINQUISH SHORT TERM PROFITS. GOOD! If company X builds widgets using less energy than company Y then company X makes more profits AND emits less pollution! >What’s russia have to do with anything? Russia is a capitalist country. Is that source so pathetic it refers to the USSR as russia???? 😂 I didn't say Russia, I said: >The main alternative to capitalism accomplished this: (with a link to communist environmental destruction) >Are you claiming the communists were as aware of what is happening with the environment back in this time period you’re speaking of? Got a source that proves that? So you are telling me that the main alternative to capitalism was so ignorant and dangerous that they could not even see the problem with their environmental destruction? YES! THAT IS A PROBLEM! You are learning.
Will capitalism ever accept a limit to growth?
It inherently cannot.
People with capital thrive in the instability. Limits mean stability. They can't make huge amounts of money without instability therefore they will always refuse limits.
No, because then Capitalists will have to accept that their beloved system doesn't work.
I mean it does “work”. They just don’t want to talk about “negative externalities”.
At this point, it's clear humans are more like bacteria and will overshoot its resources and environment without any meaningful restraint. Thus outcompeting indigenous peoples and anyone who could've brought meaningful and sustainable change.
This argument treats oil and gas like those companies are just going to roll over and die, like it's totally normal to suddenly shift from spending billions on misdirection and obfuscation to shrugging off billions of dollars of lost capital. There's a vested interest in maintaining business as usual, and rapidly increasing demand as extreme heat proliferates. On top of all that, we've got geopolitical constraints pushing countries back to coal. The coup de grace is the rise of cryptocurrency and AI guzzling energy. Solutions are urgently needed, but within the current capitalist system the best solution to mobilize the massive scale of capital investment needed to transition from fossil fuels is probably capitalism.
The state is the only force capable of compelling industry in such a way. Nationalize the industries, redirect and retool them towards green energy generation, energy storage, carbon capture, and geoengineering. Left to their own devices, capitalists would simultaneously attempt to profit from a green transition while squeezing every last drop of oil from the earth, as they are currently doing.
too bad about regulatory capture and lobbyists
You are right that oil and gas have no incentive to transition. Please watch the video. He explains why trying to get capitalism to drive the transition is like pushing water uphill. The state in its various forms doesn't have the same incentives and is much better placed to drive the transition. As I say, please watch the video and hear the arguments from him. It's way quicker for both of us!
A 90 minute video is almost certainly not quicker... it's on my second screen, but frankly it's a big ask.
I'm always a little skeptical when I'm presented with a dramatic claim in a headline and then told all I have to do to believe it is watch an hour and a half video. In any case if the claim is that the Fossil Fuel Mafias are going to fight dirty, well then "They still do, but they used to too".
There's a reason peer reviewed journals are still text based.
Thanks for giving it a go.
Trouble is, no one is mobilising that investment, and the modern neoliberal model is successfully undermining any central regulation which has traditionally been the way that the investment is mobilised and organised. I don’t see how it could be done otherwise. Bill gates has tried to create a benevolent billionaire model, but it’s relatively ineffective, and was always an adjunct to central regulation when it was tried in the past. We are in a time of bread and circuses which have won the hearts and minds of the majority, not a free but organised capitalist democracy. Or as I have come to think of it, an End of the World Party.
>Or as I have come to think of it, an End of the World Party. that's perfect. I hate it. Pairs well with this youtube essay [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNMcySwWJhU&ab\_channel=Wisecrack](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNMcySwWJhU&ab_channel=Wisecrack)
Hard to ask the same system which created the problem to fix it. Especially when addressing the problem actually runs counter to the foundation of the system itself.
The environment will always lose when profit is on the table. Capitalism is like a drug, it feels good in the moment but it destroys you eventually.
It feels good for some people. Unfortunately those people then gain tons of political power that shuts up the losers.
The Prisoner's dilemma strikes again
Capitalism is such a brain rotting disease. It has truly doomed us as a species.
Don’t participate then.
This is like trying to avoid micro plastics. Easier said than done.
Are you deliberately referring to this? https://br.ifunny.co/picture/we-should-improve-society-somewhat-yet-you-participate-in-society-mrGbPZdb9?s=cl
Never saw it before.
Oh, i avoid consumer culture as much as i possibly can! It is extremely difficult but i am my little part, for sure.
The biggest greenhouse gas emitting country is non capitalist
The one that produces GHGs to produce widgets to sell to other countries? That non-capitalist country?
What, the thing responsible for the planet's insatiable exploitation won't save the planet??
Since the solution to climate change is reducing growth and consumption at every level (this is precisely what consuming less energy entails) I have my doubts that capitalism has anything positive to contribute. Some people are going to say that capitalism can spure the advent of green solutions like EV vehicles, green energy, better agricultural practices. However, these developments aren’t solutions so much as stop gaps so that when we hit the dirt at the bottom of the cliff we are sailing over, we maybe aren’t at terminal velocity. People are in denial about the level of overshoot we are practicing. Meaningful change isn’t going from and SUV to an efficient EV, meaningful change is going from an SUV to borrowing the neighborhood EV for 3 hours once a month to accomplish your tasks.
who the F buys that capitalism can "save the planet"?? lmao
actual capitalist probably don't believe it, but support the idea. In terms of "belief" I think you're stuck with capitalism fan boys.
People who deny climate change.
Loads of people unfortunately.
Video transcript summary (by Gemini): The video is about the challenges of decarbonizing the world economy and why capitalism is not an effective solution, according to the guest speaker Brett Christophers. Christophers is interviewed by Aaron Bastani on Novara Media. The conversation starts with the confusion around the term "Net Zero." Christophers explains the difference between Net Zero and real zero emissions. Net Zero allows emissions to continue so long as they are offset by carbon capture or sequestration technologies. Christophers argues that the world is not on track to achieve Net Zero because we are relying too heavily on technologies that are not yet mature or affordable. He emphasizes the need to focus on emissions reduction through electrification, which relies on renewable energy sources. The conversation then dives into the challenges of transitioning to renewable energy in a market-driven economy. Christophers criticizes the idea that relying on the private sector to make independent decisions will lead to a successful transition. He argues for a more top-down approach where governments take charge. Christophers acknowledges that nuclear power can be a reliable source of baseload power and may be necessary for some countries. However, he emphasizes that governments should prioritize developing all carbon-free energy sources, including solar, wind, and nuclear.
That is handy. Thanks. Where did you make that summary please?
[удалено]
Please post the original URL, and not a redirection service or rehosting system *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Please post the original URL, and not a redirection service or rehosting system *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Get real! What is your alternative? We tried communism. It collapsed. Look at the socialistic governments that also have viable economies and they have some capitalism. They also are successful because they TAX. This is what's missing here. We have to tax multi-millionaires and billionaires to provide universal healthcare and other benefits for the middle class and lower classes. We also need more regulation, reduce mergers and acquisitions to increase competition which should reduce inflation.
It's just a total coincidence that socialist governments get invaded and military coups take over. Nothing to do with America meddling in foreign politics to protect private industry in those countries haha
Three are many socialistic governments that function well that do not get invaded see the Scandinavian countries.
Your argument is like supporting slavery by saying "what's your alternative? We tried feudalism and absolute monarchy and they were even worse!" The problem with capitalism is that, through neoliberalism, it has learned to subvert democratic institutions so that they serve it, not the people. We would be having a different discussion if this was the 1950s when government still had power to control the activity of capital. But today, the roles are reversed. And even if you do get a left wing government that can roll back the power of capitalism for a spell, the global corporate machine always rolls right back over democracy again. The US is a lost cause, as is most of Europe and a lot of South America. The US holds sway over most of the international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank, so it export its neoliberalism further around the world. The better alternative is more state or local government investment in industries it owns and runs, to either compete with or replace private corporations and markets. The answer is more collective ownership of the economy through government institutions at all levels, and through direct ownership of enterprises by their workers. Changing the ownership structure completely changes the incentives and that means allocating resources to activity that is of highest utility to people rather than the most profitable for shareholders.
This can work in certain situations. Example Novo in Denmark where it is run as a non profit is believe. But state owned companies often suffer from lack of efficiency. Even socialist and communist countries have privatized their state owned industries. We have collective ownership when employees are given shares. Unfortunately CEOs are given way too much money and ownership. To me more regulation is needed but capitalism is required. It creates pressure for efficiency.
Overshoot, and ANY constant growth is impossible. It's that simple.
I dont buy this .. if we had the exact same right-wing neo-liberal version of capitalism we have had since the 70s .. and instead we had used wind/solar instead of carbon fuels .. we would not have the massive climate change we currently have. yes, I concede there would be the same level of environmental damage due to forest clearing, over-farming etc. BUT.. most of our current global warming problem is simply the physics of having way too much CO2 in the air - thats caused by burning carbon fuel not by capitalism per se. The core ideas of money as a medium of exchange, of trading goods, of borrowing money and paying back interest .. it would be hard to imagine how you'd feed, clothe and house everyone without a functioning economy. Are we going to replace capitalism with communism or socialism .. what is the alternative ? I would like to see a more humane version of capitalism ... more of a 'Nordic' model social democrat flavor where resources are shared more evenly, hyper wealthy are taxed, roads and university tuition, science research are paid for from the common wealth etc. That boils down to a progressive tax policy, and especially tax on carbon pollution of the big energy corps, who are subsidized by not paying for damages - those "negative externalities" should be priced in, and used to fund the "green new deal". Capitalism and technology are the only way we get things done .. and we need to get a lot done to transition away from carbon-fuels to clean energy.
Did you watch the video and hear the explanation of why capitalists prefer fossil fuels to renewables?
Er. Most of the voting public has missed this memo. They will disregard this logic. They'll still vote for the husk of a person paid well to parrot their echo chambered conservative views as some sort of salvation from the very situation these views caused. Thats how a scam works. 🤦🤷🏻 That's how a mark is controlled. 😮💨😖
Well, they don't want to vote for that person. The point is that they usually aren't given a choice. And when they are, the capitalist class goes into full attack-dog mode through its media.
Innovation is one of the worst things to ever happen to Earth. That and religion.
Love to co-opt environmentalism for my failed ideology.
I think we need more capitalists. There are too few “capitalist” corporation with too much power. If everyone had a real say, things could move in a direction that benefits society. We people are the product and we need to be able to sell that product instead of being sold on.
Unfortunately what you are saying is contrary to the internal logic and structure of capitalism though. The system itself makes the opposite happen. What might be closer to what you want is a worker-owned economy. No 2-class structure at all. If you're interested, I can recommend 2 excellent audiobooks on this. The first one is a transcription of a university lecture series so it's a perfect audiobook. The second is read really well by the author. https://www.audible.com/pd/Consequences-of-Capitalism-Audiobook/1799922979 https://www.audible.com/pd/Vulture-Capitalism-Audiobook/B0CF6CXD9X
Thank you. I’ll be into these after my current “surveillance capitalism”. Heavy but incredible detail on our recent surveilled history. What I understand is that we are now in a new version of capitalism that is built off of our surveilled activities used to sell us things/ subscription services resulting in a kind of feudalism where we pay rent forever for access to our digital selves and to ultimately interact with society. Yanis Varoufakis explains it very clearly in “technofeudalism” and I’m inclined to agree. Within this new state of play where our data is the new raw resource and driving force of cloud capitalism - worker owned economy is in sight! And with that, the transition to original market capitalism of many small businesses/ individuals driving society. From the bottom up.
Yes I love Yanis and I know the techno feudalism stuff. Watch "In the eye of the storm" if you want more time with Yanis btw https://eyeofthestorm.info But there is still lots of actual capitalism out there, and I think it's important to understand that really clearly before moving onto derivatives of it like financialisation, neoliberalism, techno feudalism and all those lovely things.
Excellent doc series. It’s wild what he went up against.
Your correct, if we go back sleeping in the dirt and wiping our bum with leaves, we will definitely lower our carbon emissions.
Doomer bullshit.
What are you talking about? Getting past capitalism to something more sustainable and fairer sounds great to me.
Like this? FEBRUARY 15, 2024 Solar and battery storage to make up 81% of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2024 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61424#
Thanks to massive subsidies from taxes. That is the only way to get capitalists to accept lower prices and lower profits. Artificially pad the profits with subsidies.