DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 21146--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: July 26, 2023, 5:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It continues to baffle me why even the need for at least
ecofascism is not understood by so many leftists. The logic
could not be simpler:
1) The majority care more about maintaining their First World
lifestyle than about it being the cause of global warming.
2) Only a minority care about global warming enough to
voluntarily give up the First World lifestyle.
3) Given 1) and 2), relying on voluntary rejection of First
World lifestyle will be insufficient to counter global warming.
4) Given 3), to successfully counter global warming will require
state-imposed prohibition of First World lifestyle.
5) Such prohibition will never be voted for by the majority in
1).
#Post#: 21418--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate refugees
By: antihellenistic Date: August 9, 2023, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://64.media.tumblr.com/aa2653d0184b503a6367396957e4409f/d0008ba1c7410901-5e/s640x960/2fb2148a8af8486f37f43aad210e5b422c347cec.jpg
#Post#: 22122--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: September 15, 2023, 2:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Who is a better mayor: Adams (
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/china-the-ocean-is-not-japan's-trash-can/msg18960/#msg18960<br
/>) or Khan?
HTML https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-meat-no-dairy-three-103814079.html
[quote]No meat, no dairy and three outfits a year: Welcome to
Sadiq Khan’s plan for London
...
This is the radical vision of a net zero future dreamed up by
C40, a global collective of city mayors chaired by Sadiq Khan,
which advocates extreme measures to halve greenhouse gas
emissions by 2030 and limit global temperature increases to
1.5C.
The Mayor of London is, of course, no stranger to pushing the
dial on climate change. His unrelenting expansion of the Ulez
ultra low emissions zone in August faced down major criticism
from affected businesses, disadvantaged citizens and vigilante
vandals.
Khan is showing no signs of slowing down: this week, plans were
unveiled to lower the speed limit to 20mph on a further 40 miles
of roads in London, the capital’s largest-ever rollout to date.
...
Citizens’ consumption habits were its central focus
...
Its more radical suggestions involved no less than: the
abolition of private vehicles; the prohibition of meat and dairy
consumption; the rationing of new items of clothing to three
each per year; and the restriction of short-haul return flights
to one every three years.
It also proposed slashing the use of steel and cement in
construction[/quote]
Still not enough, but at least better than all the Westerners
who think the solution is in adding even more machines, such as
the following specimen of Western inferiority:
[quote]“Fresh from imposing misery on motorists through his
draconian Ulez expansion, Sadiq Khan appears to be conspiring
new ways to make people’s lives miserable,” says Craig
Mackinlay, the Tory MP who chairs the net zero scrutiny group in
parliament.
“I’ve really had enough of this authoritarian, miserabilist
approach to net zero. What we need is for technology and
innovation to allow people to become more prosperous and greener
at the same time; not poorer, colder and hungrier.”[/quote]
I am going to start proudly calling myself a miserabilist from
now on. 8)
HTML https://ochd.co.uk/db/ore/MobileCharacterPage.php?char=154001010
But back to Khan's superiority:
[quote]According to staff profiles on C40’s website, it employs
279 people outside of this management team, all of whom are
subject to a stringent eco-friendly office regime. Internal
staff documents ban the use of paper, even for note-taking and
to-do lists, as well as printing using coloured ink or on just
one side.
Flights and taxis can only be justified in “exceptional
circumstances”, additional time off in lieu is given to staff
who are forced to travel long distances by train instead, and
conferences and events should aim to only provide vegetarian and
vegan catering.[/quote]
#Post#: 23417--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate, Weather, and Climate Effects, 2020 and Beyond
By: FakeOptimism Date: November 5, 2023, 3:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No, Kurzgesagt, We WON'T Fix Climate Change - The Danger of Fake
Optimism
[quote]A rebuttal to Kurzgesagt's misleading video about
'staying hopeful' on climate change.[/quote]
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KQYNtPl7V4
Comments:
[quote]BadEmpanada
1 year ago (edited)
My original response to Kurzgesagt's comment (which is still
somewhere down below) was auto-deleted by youtube. I'm reposting
the original exchange here. YouTube keeps auto-deleting EVEN MY
OWN COMMENTS on my channel.
Kurzgesagt's comment:
"Not going to reply to this video as you have made up your mind
anyway (also ignored our 65 page source document with further
reading
HTML https://sites.google.com/view/sources-can-we-fix-climate/).
Just wanted to comment on something wrong you said: We have no
investors. Kurzgesagt is an independent channel and is almost
entirely viewer funded. We do not rely on sponsors like Gates to
keep the lights on. Although we have worked with them and other
sponsors from time to time because it makes things safer, which
is important if you want to pay your team fair wages. Kurzgesagt
the sort of small business you should be rooting for.
You fundamentally get something wrong here: Pandering to the
world view of a sponsor makes no sense if you consider the
economics of it. While the Gates sponsorships were helpful, the
amount we got over multiple years, is not that much if you need
to pay 50 people (seriously, do the math). Gates Organizations
payed us not nearly enough for us to do their bidding, or to
motivate us to please them. For example, Brilliant alone (who
also sponsored the video you criticized) funded us to a much,
much larger degree than Gates, as did Skillshare or other
organizations. But mainly, our viewers fund us through Patreon
and our shop.
You don't understand the economics of small businesses or of
channels with large teams on Youtube. If we wanted to sell out,
this would be a really bad and inefficient way to do it.
Crafting a deliberate propaganda piece with lies, sponsored by a
Learning Website, just to please an organization that is
currently not funding us is frankly conspiracy theory
wackiness."
My response:
"You accuse me of making up my mind, but you've made up yours -
you reiterate the same point as in the video. 'Doomerism is
bad!' - it's really hardly even a thing, and you never
demonstrate that it is much of one. Worse, there's not a single
government in the world with the stance of 'climate change is
real and caused by humans but we can't stop it so let's do
nothing'. It is completely non-existent as a relevant political
current, it has absolutely zero influence. So the video is
underpinned by a strawman, which it then uses as an excuse to
peddle fake optimism. Those who acknowledge the true extent of
climate change which you gloss over are the ones doing the most
to fight it - even imperfect groups like Extinction Rebellion
engaging in direct action are heroes in comparison to a channel
spreading the notion of 'the market'll fix it.'
Firstly, it's completely ridiculous that the single mention of
your Gates Foundation 'grant' is what you chose to single out.
The money you received from Gates was not mentioned until 53
minutes into a 66 minute video. You look at this single mention
of this fact, which was intentionally (as stated in the video!)
left until the conclusion to avoid muddying the waters, and
dishonestly spin that into the idea that I'm peddling a
conspiracy theory that Gates controls you. Even though in the
video I mentioned NOTHING MORE than the idea that Gates gave you
this money because the arguments presented in your videos are
useful for protecting & furthering his interests, which is just
uncontroversially true - that is why any individual or
organization gives out no-questions-asked funding, because they
think the receiver is doing something that they agree with. At
no point was it ever even remotely implied that you made this
video at the behest of Bill Gates, I am in fact 100% sure you
didn't and made that clear in the video. This part of the video
is actually just completely unimportant to its arguments and it
would have practically been the same if I'd never even mentioned
it. You focusing on this is a cop-out that is not only false,
but you're using it to avoid addressing the actual arguments put
forth in the video, instead trying to paint it as merely
presenting a conspiracy theory.
I'm sure you have no 'investors', by the technical meaning of
the term, *now*, but you absolutely had them earlier - they're
what made your channel a viable enterprise in the first place.
$600,000 goes a long way to building up a base. You can talk
about the semantics of a 'grant' vs an 'investment', but
functionally they're the same: someone like Bill Gates doesn't
need to invest for profits, he needs to invest to influence
policy. Investment (or a 'grant') in a YouTube channel that
spreads the sorts of economic policies he supports is just as
important to the performance of his portfolio as investment to
gain a more direct profit. If I got a $600,000 investment I
could turn my channel into a multi-million dollar enterprise
within a few years, anyone can do it. You discounting it is
reminscent of the classic Trump line 'just a small loan of a
million dollars'. Most people could do a whole lot with a
million dollars. I make these videos on $1,500 a month entirely
alone, give me $600,000 and I can hire enough help to make an
hour long video every week with 5x the quality, which will
exponentionally increase channel growth over the course of 7
years (the time since your grant). Tell me that I don't know how
to run a business all you want - but the reason I'm not getting
the $$$ from monopolists like you to kickstart my channel is
because my ideas won't make them money. You know 'how to run a
business' in the sense that you know how to say things that
appealed to the right people, that's really it. Me (one person)
and your business actually make money in the exact same way,
through making YouTube videos, so I understand it perfectly,
thank you very much. You merely hire others to do most of the
work for you, something which you can only do now due to the
initial $$$ you had years ago.
As for how you have been influenced by Gates, why he funded you,
etc? The way capitalist propaganda generally works, outside of
the most direct organizations such as think-tanks, is through
funding/hiring those who are already saying the sorts of things
that benefit capitalists. So the reason you got your big funding
windfall from Gates is because he liked what you were saying, he
thought that it aligned with his overall goals which undeniably
involve maintaining the very system that got him to where he is
today. This creates a further incentive structure for you (or
anyone else - I'm not just singling you out here) to continue to
spread the same sorts of ideas. Gates may not have sponsored you
any more than his 'small loan' of just $600,000, but others like
him doubtlessly have since, and the audience which has already
been primed to be inclined to such narratives through the
hegemonic nature of this sort of propaganda just give you even
more of an incentive to keep at it. It pays to tell people that
the status quo is (mostly) fine, that the system can handle the
problem. That's half true, the system could potentially handle
the problem (and my proposed solutions here are actually
entirely capitalist ones, since state companies and
nationalizations have and do exist under capitalism. My
proposals are New Deal style, not new innovations), but people
like Gates are preventing us from doing so. Yet I don't think
you'd ever get into that.
Feel free to prove me wrong in your follow-up video, that would
be a very welcome surprise. It would be very important for a
channel with 20 million subscribers to come out and advocate for
nationalizations and public ownership of manufacturing to fight
climate change.
BTW, you say I ignored your source document? No, I address it in
the video, actually. And plopping up a bunch of sources in a
disorderly fashion without even using them to support your
argument is not a cop out. Do you see how I cite my sources IN
THE VIDEO ITSELF? More of them than you, despite being one
person on a shoestring budget? That's how you do it. Just
putting a list of next to no context sources in a Google Doc
without actually explaining how they fit into your overarching
arguments and the points you're making is very dishonest, it's a
way to say 'look at all these things that I say prove me right,
when I don't actually explain how, yet which I curiously didn't
actually put in the video itself.' Just saying 'I have sources'
is also pretty useless against my response. I barely even
contested the veracity of your individual statements, I
contested how you utilise them. You might have a source that
proves that light bulbs are becoming more efficient - and? Your
argument was that this is a sign of progress towards fighting
climate change, which is a massive logical leap from the actual
fact. That's just one example but it is an accurate
characterisation of how you utilised your sources here."[/quote]
[quote]"Some will not survive" -Kurzgesagt
This line made me crack up. Total "some of you will die but
that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" energy.[/quote]
[quote]We called it inverse paranoia back in the 80s. "The
pathological belief that everything will be fine."[/quote]
Alot of the people that will die come from parts of the world
that had nothing to do with the creation of the climate
crisis...
#Post#: 24964--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: February 3, 2024, 2:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Who takes environmentalism seriously?
[img width=1280
height=546]
HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GEspmE-a0AA6ree?format=jpg&name=large[/img]
End democracy and start ecofascism now!
#Post#: 25767--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: April 5, 2024, 10:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The True Left message has penetrated into the UN!
HTML https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Fli65fIcHkg
:)
#Post#: 26220--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: rp Date: May 2, 2024, 10:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img]
HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E62HhFPXMAYMGHx?format=jpg&name=900x900[/img]
Western* men
#Post#: 26222--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 2, 2024, 11:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
See also:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/homo-hubris/msg11527/?topicseen#msg11527
#Post#: 26227--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 3, 2024, 3:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
But AI is even worse:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aBNIekp4qY
As I keep saying, problems created by Western civilization
cannot be solved by more Western civilization.
#Post#: 26351--------------------------------------------------
Re: True Left breakthrough: seriousness in environmentalism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: May 9, 2024, 8:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This is how inferior Western civilization is:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjNacsyp28s
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page