How do you plan on dealing with Global Warming, overpopulation, resource depletion and so on and so forth without falling into what is, basically, extreme eugenic fascism (pop depletion) and global colonization, global warfare?
Unless you're a climate change denier (you're not a climate change denier, are you, user?), you'll have to realize that both liberalism and communism fail in this regard.
Other urls found in this thread:
animemaru.com
twitter.com
...
Sure is intellectual heavyweights in here.
For people complaining about Holla Forums you sure are full of bitterness and autism just the same.
You've really got me in a tight spot there, user. How will I and the rest of leftypol ever recover?
Without being shackled by the profit motive it wouldn't even be that difficult to: convert from fossil fuels to nuclear energy, design products that last for decades rather than months, revitalise public transport and make the remaining cars electric, conserve resources for the future instead of having to use them right away or go broke, and recycle everything that is possible to do so.
It's capitalism that can't ever tackle climate change/resource depletion. Eugenics isn't even needed.
How do you work on forcing the rest of the world to do the same? Or are we assuming a "global international communist revolution" kind of scenario?
Overpopulation is a meme.
call me malthus all you want
All the things you listed are only issues because of capitalism in the first place.
Oh, you don't actually care what the answer is.
Well obviously you can't do much about another country you don't control but that's true with every system. Failing a world revolution all you can do is the best you can in your country, maybe try shame the rest of the world into doing something. But like I said I don't see how any other model could save the world alone in one country.
Would you say that failing a world revolution would mean failure for all earth? Half the world is already shaming itself.
The institution of a system that is 100% proficient at distributing and utilizing resources would require warfare and authoritarian imperialism.
It's not really for me to say but certainly the chances of us having a world revolution and averting the worst of climate change look pretty slim. One country can make a difference to an extent though by providing an example and moral leadership.
citation needed
On a worldwide scale, it pretty much would. Every peaceful alternative has been tried.
You've got to agree that "moral leadership" doesn't work to the same extent that imperialist subjugation does, and the ozone layer, ice caps etc. won't stop melting because of individual efforts.
There's so many things wrong with this statement that all I can do is laugh.
...
In which way do you think communism fails in regard to climate change?
Global warming and resource depletion are both caused by the profit-based commodity production, so guess what has to go to end it or at least heavily slow it down.
Overpopulation could be stopped with increasing the quality of life, but that's not going to happen, because the areas with large pop growth have their resources extracted, so they continue to live in shit and breed like rabbits.
Also because condoms were literally created by Satan, but that's a separate issue
Are the two least efficient and most wasteful activities one can participate in. The US military, for example, is the world's largest oil consumer.
Unless you're going for nuclear winter would be one way to avert global warming.
