Brother I don’t even know how you plan to sit here and pretend like those are separate issues. You can’t separate capitalism and climate change. You simply cannot.
As you add more issues, then the Venn diagram of overlap of all the issues gets smaller and smaller. It doesn’t matter if you think this is an obvious objective truth. What matters is what other people think, because you won’t have much of a “movement” without other people who agree and join you.
It has a large overlap with the original issue. (I would say it’s a superset but no capitalism wouldn’t necesnecessarily completely solve the climate crisis.)
Exactly, and you literally cannot work on that issue if you don’t understand that capitalism climate change are linked. Any attempt to address climate change without addressing the problems of capitalism will always fail because capitalism is what is allowed it to get to this point and to continue to become worse. There’s literally not one thing you could do to address climate change that will not be undermined by the capitalist class. Anyone paying attention should know that right now.
There are only a few big billionaires. They could agree on protecting nature. I believe that they have chosen to continue for the northern shipping routes.
Educate the working class, instead of making them ignorant on purpose so they won’t revolt, so when they seize the means of production they think greener then?
For the influence to change the world, it will be millions or billions.
You also have to exploit some nature to protect the rest.
This is a Stalin level of monstocity, or beyond.
Is it a price worth paying? Because even if it is something else, like a Communist approach, the efforts will be the same. E.g. if China ends up protecting nature globally, they have paid that price.
In France the green party has always been on the left. They always talk about Muslims, the burka, feminism, or Palestine nowadays. That’s why voters are very confused.
Our greens too. And they also had to force closing nuclear plants, but when the closing date came closer and people started to ask where their power would come from, the greens said they’d built natural gas plants. Nobody took them seriously after that, and the decision of closing of nuclear plants was reversed.
Brother I don’t even know how you plan to sit here and pretend like those are separate issues. You can’t separate capitalism and climate change. You simply cannot.
That’s not the point they’re making.
As you add more issues, then the Venn diagram of overlap of all the issues gets smaller and smaller. It doesn’t matter if you think this is an obvious objective truth. What matters is what other people think, because you won’t have much of a “movement” without other people who agree and join you.
It’s not more issues. It’s the same issue.
It has a large overlap with the original issue. (I would say it’s a superset but no capitalism wouldn’t necesnecessarily completely solve the climate crisis.)
We can also do united fronts. We don’t all have to agree on everything to work on aset of issues
Exactly, and you literally cannot work on that issue if you don’t understand that capitalism climate change are linked. Any attempt to address climate change without addressing the problems of capitalism will always fail because capitalism is what is allowed it to get to this point and to continue to become worse. There’s literally not one thing you could do to address climate change that will not be undermined by the capitalist class. Anyone paying attention should know that right now.
It’s linked but Communism can also be unsustainable. Climate change is known since 1970 or such.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea
There are only a few big billionaires. They could agree on protecting nature. I believe that they have chosen to continue for the northern shipping routes.
Educate the working class, instead of making them ignorant on purpose so they won’t revolt, so when they seize the means of production they think greener then?
Most people in the US right now read at a 6th grade level.
Don’t waste time trying to bring them up; change your message to something they understand.
“Tax the rich! No more billionaires!”
You can try that.
Ironically you could also try protecting nature by becoming a leading Capitalist and owning all means of production yourself.
But to become a leading capitalist you must exploit hundreds of thousands of people.
This process strips you of most of your humanity and empathy, thus you will likely no longer care about “protecting nature”.
For the influence to change the world, it will be millions or billions. You also have to exploit some nature to protect the rest.
This is a Stalin level of monstocity, or beyond.
Is it a price worth paying? Because even if it is something else, like a Communist approach, the efforts will be the same. E.g. if China ends up protecting nature globally, they have paid that price.
In France the green party has always been on the left. They always talk about Muslims, the burka, feminism, or Palestine nowadays. That’s why voters are very confused.
Our greens too. And they also had to force closing nuclear plants, but when the closing date came closer and people started to ask where their power would come from, the greens said they’d built natural gas plants. Nobody took them seriously after that, and the decision of closing of nuclear plants was reversed.
Call me paranoid but that sounds like leadership was compromised by counter-interests.
Chefurka’s ladder of awareness moment
You have to take a step back and look at how politics actually works.
No one can do anything unless they get elected; and no one can take a strong stand on every issue and win an election.