No, we haven't gotten on the boat. Who cares how dirty energy is when so much of it is wasted? Who cares if electricity comes from solar or wind, if you're still adding PFAS to any furniture and other dirty chemicals in all food supply chains.
Industrial lobbies (aka "green capitalism") are trying to frame the debate as a question of clean energies, but for decades scientists have known and studied that consuming less, and more durable products is the only way out of this global crisis. Another example, industrial organic agriculture (yes that's a thing) is still very damaging to the environment in many ways (eg. contributing to desertification of soils), while permaculture/agroforestry is good for everyone but less profitable.
So i replied to the original comment in good faith, but such arguments are usually pushed by industrialists who explicitly profit from destroying the environment and silencing the narratives of actual scientists and environmentalists. Capitalism is what destroyed everything (see also scientists naming this geological era "capitalocene"), and nothing it can produce it can fix the inherent death-bringing at its core.
Hey, I don't meet a lot of people like you in real life these days. What's your opinion of the concept of comparative advantage?
To me it's the "real" mathematical law from which capitalism spawns, but it breaks down at the extremes. If the AI paperclip maximizer can produce 10^100 paperclips a day, and I can only produce 1, it might make more sense to the maximizer to take my atoms apart and put them back together in a more optimal configuration - which of course is bad news for me. I figure an actual dissident probably has a stronger criticism than me, so I'm curious.
Industrial lobbies (aka "green capitalism") are trying to frame the debate as a question of clean energies, but for decades scientists have known and studied that consuming less, and more durable products is the only way out of this global crisis. Another example, industrial organic agriculture (yes that's a thing) is still very damaging to the environment in many ways (eg. contributing to desertification of soils), while permaculture/agroforestry is good for everyone but less profitable.
So i replied to the original comment in good faith, but such arguments are usually pushed by industrialists who explicitly profit from destroying the environment and silencing the narratives of actual scientists and environmentalists. Capitalism is what destroyed everything (see also scientists naming this geological era "capitalocene"), and nothing it can produce it can fix the inherent death-bringing at its core.