Climate Change - Is Socialism the only solution?

How severe is the supposed "catastrophe" of climate change set to befall our civilisation? I don't doubt it is occurring, but if the world's major powers shift leftwards, could we not have developed various technological and chemical innovations to deal with it by then? For example, the use of Nuclear Energy to provide the electricity for fuel cells in cars, planes, public transport etc. In addition, in the short term industrial emissions could be pumped underground, and in addition the use of Amines and hydronium ions in the atmosphere to trap carbon

Socialism would allow these innovations to take place more swiftly, and would eliminate issues of profitability vs unprofitability as far as their implementation goes.

Other urls found in this thread:
It is possible to deal with it under capitalism as long as they actually DO something about it.

If it threatens profits, it will not be tackled in any meaningful way either by corporate power or the bourgeois state.

Losing workers due to near extinction sounds like a good way to lower profits. The bourgies don't want to work so they'd need to have enough workers around to avoid it.

Long-term considerations are irrelevant to the capitalist class; the very nature of the system compels them to think purely in the very short term, as actors they can do nothing else.

Solar power is gaining more ground every day. Also reminder that China is the world's greatest producer of solar power.

basically nothing can save us. within twenty years mass food shortages will be the norm in the third world and the migrant crisis will increase hundreds of times over.

even our fucking streets can't handle climate change and critical infrastructure worldwide is already just failing under the extreme temperatures of the 2010s. it will only get worse as trends like bitcoin, or a war with iran exacerbate already existing issues.

you and everyone you know is going to starve to death or die in a war over the last arable piece of land.

No, it's not. It's impossible to create any sustainable anti-Capitalist policy under Capitalism. AnCom is right:

Any Green politician who is not an outspoken Socialist is a hypocrite. Moreover, putting emphasis on Ecology without making direct link to Capitalism means that the option that preserves Capitalism will inevitably be chosen over any alternatives. IRL this usually means strengthening of Capitalist State - and eventual suppression of the population (i.e. Fascism).

Prisoner's Dilemma. If you don't exploit everything to the maximum, you are being outcompeted.

Capitalists need to have obvious 100%-certain ecological catastrophe in the immediate future - with direct and unavoidable personal consequences - to even consider doing anything. Even then most Capitalists will attempt to weasel out - they've been conditioned for generations to avoid responsibility for their actions.


We've known this is going on for over 40 years. Being happy that solar power is 'gaining ground' is really just pathetic at this point.


Tenets of Stalinism:

Literally every single one of these points is going to be needed to deal with global warming this century. We'll need huge infrastructure spending to put us on clean energy, sustainable transport, insulated homes, and so on. Not to mention massive levees and water management projects to prevent important cities from getting swamped. We'll need a massive state-managed relocation program to get people out of danger areas and put up sea barriers, as well as to deal with millions of refugees. All of the oil company CEOs, all the conservative pundits, the anti-nuclear hippies, and so on will have to disappear. Food and water rationing will be required to prevent mass starvation, and new farmlands will have to be perpetually seized as the arable land region changes. We'll have to invade countries that refuse to move to sustainable energy and green living.

When I look at the reality of climate change… the droughts and floods, the famine and war it will cause… The only logical solution I can see is an ecological dictatorship of the proletariat. I am for Eco-Stalinism.

It's way too late to avert it, the most we can do is prepare for it and mitigate the damage

Next human bottleneck

I've seen this post before.

It's far too late for that to have any effect. Just twenty to 10 years ago we were in the window of "almost not point of no return, but we can change", and guess what, there wasn't enough change.

And we slid past the finish line to Point of No Return. It's nice we're investing in reducing greenhouse gasses long after the point when it shoved have been given the urgency it requires, but we didn't, now all we can do is delay the worst aspects of it. I don't even know if we will.

Not good enough. Solar requires rare materials that we only have so much of, and a huge amount of energy to produce in the first place. You're right that China is taking good and necessary measures, but it doesn't prove the status quo is sufficient. China's capitalism is more adept in dealing with issues with no profit motive, but is still ultimately tied to the pitfalls of capital, ie production for exchange, falling rate of profit, etc. The only way to circumvent resource shortage and climate change is a social system of distribution that doesn't rely on peoples' short term desires.

Your meme will never take off and isn't funny in the slightest. Shut the fuck up and even more so if you actually believe in this.

Addressing climate change is not possible in an economic system predicated on perpetual economic growth. There's something called 'Jevon's Paradox,' which states that gains in efficiency are fed back into the system and end up intensifying exploitation in the long run. A massive expansion of renewable/nuclear power, carbon sequestration, etc. don't solve the problem unless they are deployed within an economic system that is steady-state or practices controlled degrowth. Otherwise the increase in pollution and resource use from economic expansion will eat the savings from more efficient technology.

'Eco-socialism' is not the only way to successfully achieve a no-growth economy, however it is the only humane option for the majority of humanity. The problem is that resource depletion and climate pollution are undermining the conditions for a socialist society to exist. An alternative like the intentional extermination of the surplus population could achieve an ecologically positive outcome, but a society that could carry that out successfully would be barbarous.

Unironically support this.
Pretty sure I even came up with the term.

It's not a meme, it's dead serious.

Yes. Next question.

Of course not, silly.

socialism could have saved us 20 years ago, but we failed. we're fucked.

get some land as far north as you can and work to be as self sufficient as possible, when the roving bands of starving people (migrations of hundreds of millions) what socialist government can be both egalitarian and provide and still turn away hundreds of millions of starving children.

Central America is going to burn, the jungles cannot handle the irregular and extreme heat. Mexico is becoming a desert. All of those people need to go somewhere. China knows very well what it is going to do with the 3-400,000,000 of islanders who used to rely on fish but can no longer sustain themselves due to over fishing which is only being exacerbated by extreme ocean temperatures.

What's China going to do?

the images are of the islands China is building on the migration path from soon to be starving Malaysia, Phillipines, Indonesia, etc. They are being built as weapons platforms (confirmed) and in my speculation detention facilities.

The CPC is fully aware of the future climate change brings; though, imo, because of their relationship with capital they cannot take the necessary steps and designs of self sufficient cities and other eco projects on the mainland have languished due to politics and corruption.

The only option left is a militaristic, hyper nationalist position, the preferred option of capital. A close following of their border relations with india/vietnam/phillipines/etc, international posturing, and at what point their domestic capital has developed to, tells you that this is exactly the route they are going.


So we're basically fucked regardless.
Anything we can possibly do or should we just try to live the best life possible til the ecological catastrophe occurs?

chinese and indian troops are getting into fist fights in the disputed border regions.

I want to die

Like the rest of the world is gonna be better. At least drowning is pretty quick.

Yeah, the big chunks o land will be way better, thanks

this is BS, China is taking major steps towards renewable energy. they're going to entirely replace their bus fleets with electric buses by 2020, they're shutting down coal plants and replacing with nuclear, hydro, solar, and wind.

Google Bookchin

lol literally nothing you said conflicts with my post. The time where switching to renewables and lowering emissions is enough has passed (20-30 years ago). China has identified this and has proposed a number of massive infrastructure projects ala green cities, but as I've said most of this is completely moot because of politics/corruption.

What happened to their forest cities?? What is the cpc doing about the massive poaching and sale of endangered wildlife??