Svante
The idea that it were impossible to stop #ClimateChange without massive social upheaval (e. g. »ending #capitalism«) is in my view already disproved: there are big industrial grids that have mostly decarbonized almost accidentally without such a revolution, e. g. France, Sweden, Ontario.
The question is why it's still being brought up.
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Climate change and environmental degradation in general are only done because there is a financial incentive for capitalist countries to do so, an incentive created by the capitalist need of infinite growth and profit accumulation. The countries that you mentioned that have decarbonized are outliers amongst dozens of capitalist countries that haven't and have no incentive to do so because their intrests prioritize profit accumulation over protecting and preserving the environment. 1/2
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
That is why people say that the only way to truly stop climate change is to replace capitalism, the system the has profit as the top priority, with socialism, a system that has human well-being (and by extension, also the well-being of the environment that humans live in) as the top priority. 2/2
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Cuba, just to give one example, is a country that has abolished capitalism and has survived, but besides that, the incentive to not de-carbonize lies within capitalism itself, that incentive being that capitalism, of which its top priority is profit, can make money from commodifying nature and destroying it in the process. 1/2
Svante
@Radical_EgoCom Given how incredibly hard it seems to be to replace capitalism (no country has done it and survived), and how it seems in comparison to be much easier to decarbonize, it appears like a very effective delaying tactic.
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Eliminating capitalism and replacing it with an environmentally conscious socialism eliminates not only climate change but also the incentive to engage in the destruction of the environment. 2/2
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
There have been reforms in the Cuban economy done out of necessity allowing limited private enterprise and foreign investment, but the economic structure of Cuba still remains largely socialist, with the vast majority of the means of production being owned by the state, so I still see it as appropriate to refer to Cuba as a socialist state because of this. 1/2
Skull-man(🇨🇺🇨🇦)
@Radical_EgoCom @Ardubal
As a Cuban myself, allow me to disagree with using Cuba as an example here. "..has abolished capitalism.."? It tried, but failed miserably. Today Cuban live under a very weird form of neoliberalism that I don't see as the goal of any society. "..has survived..", that is a stretch. They are barely surviving one day after another with no clear path into the future, if you have time and energy to think about the future, that is.
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Cuba has both in the past and present faced and is facing constant (and illegal) sanctions on their country by the US and other similarly aligned capitalist states, yet despite all of it, in addition to being a small country, has managed to survive while making minimal compromises, and the fact that they've managed to do this speaks volumes for the capabilities of both Cuba and socialism in general. 2/2
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
The current status of Cuba isn't what I think people should aspire for. I only used Cuba as one example of a country that abolished capitalism and survived. What I think people should aspire towards is a state socialist model that has both eliminated the profit driven motive of environmental degradation due to its socialist nature and is outwardly protective of the environment.
Svante
@Radical_EgoCom @osmani Let's not over-simplify here, but however you define the current status of Cuba, it definitely is not in any position to decarbonize in any forseeable timeframe.
If you claim to need A to be able to do B, i. e. (not (and (not A) B)), then you would need to have NO instances of (and (not A) B), and it would help to have a demonstration instance of (and A B). But instead, you do have instances of (and (not A) B), and an instance of (and A (not B)).
Svante
@Radical_EgoCom @osmani I think that illustrates my point: abolishing capitalism has little to do with stopping climate change. People claiming you need to abolish capitalism in order to stop climate change are more interested in the former than in the latter.
That is not to say that unchecked capitalism works, of course. See the other branch of this conversation at https://mastodon.xyz/@Ardubal/113715494783050941
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.