My main account is [email protected]. I’m also using the one here because I really like the feed feature.
Btw I’m a non-binary trans person [they/she/he].
The super rich are (…) a vast minority
It seems to me that the math in this is overwhelming. If a single person in this minority emits in 90min more than an average person in their lifetime, we should take into consideration that their lifetime is made of many, many, many 90min slots.
Apart from that of course I’m all in for sustainable living and redistribution of wealth for lower classes. Preferably abolish the class-system all together, of course.
Emissions per capita are a distraction that makes us focus on a us, everyday people, instead of the major polluters: the super wealthy and their toxic coorporations. Don’t fall for it!
The Nordic model’s approach is relevant in imo, because this article is about Sweden, and because this path proved not be safe from capitalism taking over. This does not contradict what you said, that the entire world is electing right wing populists right now. It is a reminder that this is a mechanism that capitalism traditionaly uses to resolve its crises.
Yep. To my understanding, in the Nordic model, capitalism continues to devour all socialist tendencies.
I think it’s non-binding, after all.
Dammit, I am confused.
In this article from BBC, it says:
The ruling is non-binding
In another article from the Guardian, it says the opposite:
Countries are now bound under international law
Which one is it?
I’m afraid you’re totally right.
Edit: The strikethrought. Now that I think about it, all this destruction is part of the ethnic cleansing. It’s a way to forcefully displace Palestinians. By making Gaza unlivable, it’s also a way to prevent them to return there.
I don’t see effective regulations being put into place to restrict capitalist exploitation. On the contrary, the regulations are in favor of capitalism, and capitalism is ferosiously distructive.
So, what I mean by saying organise is that due to the fact that neoliberalism has bought off politicians (political systems I should say) worldwide, it is important to organise ourselves in order to get rid of its eternal growth model, which is destroying life on this planet.
The Rojava example is one of my favorite approaches.
I have only lived in europe and these are the conclusions I’ve made so far.
Ok, you say the following
Regulation is just how we make that choice as a collective.
For me, the answer is
Organize.
I suppose it depends on one’s perspective.
To dislike (or worse) an article and its author, it’s one thing. From that to draw conclusions about all americans seems like a stretch to me.
Nevertheless, I would appreciate some clarification on the following statement, if you don’t mind.
Americans being unable to understand the public space as a concept
What do you believe you understand about public space as a concept that americans don’t?
Edit: Looks like the author is Bolivian, not american
Edit2: Sorry my bad. That’s another Ana Flores. This one is
Ana Karen Flores is a first-generation Latina communications strategist who commands the narrative and drives real political change. She’s a Public Voices fellow with The OpEd Project and works alongside the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice and the Every Page Foundation.
For me, there are to many “ifs” and assumptions in this hypothesis.
Copy-pasting here my comment to this article from another community:
Carbon Capture and Storage/Sequestration (CCS) is a topic I changed my mind about, not that long ago, including its subsets like Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), Direct Air Capture (DAC), etc. Up to last year or something, I was thinking that it’s important for these kind of tech to be researched.
Now I see things differently:
To my understanding, the only CCS tech that makes sense is the one that catches emissions at the source, the factory chimneys.
The others that claim to suck up GHG and store them “out of sight out of mind” are highly problematic for so many reasons. They are distractions from the real issue which is phasing out fossil fuel.
A few relevant links:
Fact or fantasy? Can carbon dioxide removal save the climate?
For fossil fuel corporations, keeping CDR on the agenda as a credible climate change solution is a Get Out of Jail Free card. Instead of stopping emissions, they promise to capture and bury them. Not now, but someday. As the CEO of Occidental Petroleum told a conference of her peers in 2023, “We believe that our direct capture technology is going to be the technology that helps to preserve our industry over time. This gives our industry a license to continue to operate for the 60, 70, 80 years that I think it’s going to be very much needed.”[
Climeworks’ capture fails to cover its own emissions
The carbon capture company Climeworks only captures a fraction of the CO2 it promises its machines can capture. The company is failing to carbon offset the emissions resulting from its operations – which have grown rapidly in recent years.
More articles in the relevant community:
[email protected]
Your comment reminded me of a recent article from Carbon Brief:
Experts: Which climate tipping point is the most concerning?
[…] boys will be aborted and neglected in favour of girls
It’s the first time I hear about this. Any relevant links you could share that corroborate this take?
This article is not really about mathematical talent. It mentions that stereotypes might be reproduced by attributing success in girls to diligence and in boys to talent, but it’s about mathematical ability.
At the start of the first school year (when children are five or six years old), there are no differences, on average, between boys and girls in mathematical ability. But after just four months, boys have pulled ahead. The gap widens throughout the year.
If you click on the relevant link above, you will find the report itself. You can even download the methodology note seperately.