• @Candelestine
      link
      English
      -27 months ago

      I’m proposing we do not attempt to control their destinies. That means we cannot control their carbon. This in turn means that whether severe climate change happens or not is out of the power of the west to control. It is Modi’s decision to make. We can only observe, mostly helplessly.

      So, we need to focus on things we can help with.

      Unless you know of something we can do to influence overseas carbon that I don’t. An embargo perhaps? Blockade maybe?

      • DarkThoughts
        link
        fedilink
        57 months ago

        Yeah, no, sorry. Come back when our glorious West is actually climate neutral before pointing fingers towards countries that are still developing. This is ridiculously stupid.

        • @Candelestine
          link
          English
          07 months ago

          One does not have to be without fault, to see and criticize it in others. Otherwise it becomes too easy to just repeats the same mistakes. This is actually wisdom, not stupidity, where we try to learn from history. Even other people’s history.

          • DarkThoughts
            link
            fedilink
            37 months ago

            No. It’s stupid to expect countries to halt their development while we sit on our comfortable asses. Especially since it is our living standards that brought us into this mess.

            • @Candelestine
              link
              English
              -17 months ago

              I’m not asking anyone to halt their development. I’m asking you, you specifically, to realize that if they don’t, then global warming happens. So, global warming is gonna happen. We no longer have control, it’s not our choice to make.

              So, onto the next problem.

              • darq
                link
                fedilink
                17 months ago

                So, global warming is gonna happen. We no longer have control, it’s not our choice to make.

                You’ve flipped flopped between we don’t need to take drastic action, and no action we can take can help.

                Conveniently, both means you get to ignore arguments to actually do something to mitigate the damage.

                Which really is your entire motivation.

                • @Candelestine
                  link
                  English
                  27 months ago

                  Really I’m arguing a position directly in the middle. Extremely drastic action of the kind that would be effective is no longer feasible. No action is unacceptable, as it would get much, much worse.

                  Which is why I’m arguing for some action, but an overall understanding that 1.5 C warming is toast, and 2.0 C might be around the corner, so we need to begin transitioning more attention and resources towards mitigation and reversal. For instance, seas are rising. We probably do have a responsibility to the people that are already being displaced.

                  Since we have limited power, we should pursue limited methods of prevention, basically. I think we should not overly pressure India in particular, because it wouldn’t budge Modi, and they’re feasting on cheap Russian fossil fuels. We can and should work towards carbon neutral ourselves, quickly. But we shouldn’t think we can control the rest of the world somehow, and make them do it too. That means things are gonna get hot.