Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#11

Post by deevolution »

adrianN wrote: post #7
deevolution wrote: post #6

The KISS solution would be to shoot all 1.4B cows on earth. That would slow climate change significantly and give us enough time to transition the world into using renewable resources. Also before I get downvoted for suggesting such an appalling idea as going on a cow murdering genocide, stop and reflect about the origin of that big piece of meat you ate for dinner tonight. Let's kill these cows once and for all.

Methane accounts for less than 20% of all GHG emissions (in CO2 equivalent units), and cows are only responsible for a part of that. Reducing the number of cattle is important, but killing all cattle would only buy us a few years before we have to completely decarbonize the global economy. In industrialized economies, agriculture's relative impact is even lower, since we emit so many GHGs from other sources.

It's still a significant contributor of methane. This change wont happen overnight of course but more alt meat companies such as beyond meat and impossible burger will be able to engineer superior food products that will eventually price real meat out of the market. The cow populations will suffer slowly as will their corporate slave masters.

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#13

Post by devoply »

In the end our business leaders and state leaders are too busy exploiting science to empower and enrich themselves to have any actual concern about science, i.e. ask environmental scientists what they should do in their business and political decisions... And similarly the alt-right is weary of science because it gets in the way of its dreams of domination, control, supremacy and tribalism. They have more in common, the supposed would be Eco-fascists and the business interests than the casual observer is led to believe.

Science is better paired with idealists who can imagine a better world using science than with rationalists who are simply exploited by business interest and the state for more power and profit... solving trivial issues like how to get more eyeballs for ad dollars.

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#14

Post by Taniwha »

deogeo wrote: post #2

> The sheer novelty of Dooley’s existence has proven irresistible to journalists—netting her gawking profiles in The New Yorker, Harper’s, and on National Public Radio—but that coverage has tended to obscure her extremism. Alongside advocating for sustainable energy, Dooley’s other pet issues are opposing amnesty for undocumented immigrants and increasing border security. Enforcing current immigration law, which woul…

For New Zealand it's 25%, Australia 22%, the UK 14%, France 9%, Germany 12%, Canada 22%, the Netherlands 19%

Frankly 15% is about average for Western Countries

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#15

Post by atoav »

adventuretime wrote: post #4

Not surprised to see the left slowly distancing itself from environmentalism (save climate hysteria), given the coming African population bomb: http://theconversation.com/theres-a-strong-chance-that-one-t... 4.5 billion Africans by 2100 will mean ecological devastation the likes of which we've never seen, and traditional environmentalism will increasingly prove difficult to reconcile with anti-racism.

In Europe environmentalism is a fundamental part of every left leaning party and overpopulation is a topic old as stone — parties usually have some kind of stance here that goes as follows:

“Do what you can to raise the standard in Africa while making that investment help their economies and help the planet by absorbing CO2. A raised living standard reduces birth rates and migration while at the same time it could help the environment if done right.”

There are ideas like solar farms in africa that produce hydrogen which is in turn beeing shipped and used for electricity etc.

So to say they don’t have concepts says more about you than about those who you try to criticise here..

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#16

Post by Taniwha »

colechristensen wrote: post #8
deogeo wrote: post #2

> The sheer novelty of Dooley’s existence has proven irresistible to journalists—netting her gawking profiles in The New Yorker, Harper’s, and on National Public Radio—but that coverage has tended to obscure her extremism. Alongside advocating for sustainable energy, Dooley’s other pet issues are opposing amnesty for undocumented immigrants and increasing border security. Enforcing current immigration law, which woul…

China and Japan are both quite unfriendly to outsiders and ridiculous choices to compare with a country formed almost entirely of immigrants from the quite recent past.

In the past few years Japan has realised it's heading for demographic issues, it's opening up its immigration, I expect this to change quite quickly

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#17

Post by weddpros »

deevolution wrote: post #6

The KISS solution would be to shoot all 1.4B cows on earth. That would slow climate change significantly and give us enough time to transition the world into using renewable resources. Also before I get downvoted for suggesting such an appalling idea as going on a cow murdering genocide, stop and reflect about the origin of that big piece of meat you ate for dinner tonight. Let's kill these cows once and for all.

I did not have kids, I won't have kids. If you want to have a lasting impact on earth, refrain from having kids. Problem solved.

In the meantime, I'll keep eating beef in an effort to get rid of the 1.4B cows you want dead.

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#18

Post by jgmjgm »

Taniwha wrote: post #14
deogeo wrote: post #2

> The sheer novelty of Dooley’s existence has proven irresistible to journalists—netting her gawking profiles in The New Yorker, Harper’s, and on National Public Radio—but that coverage has tended to obscure her extremism. Alongside advocating for sustainable energy, Dooley’s other pet issues are opposing amnesty for undocumented immigrants and increasing border security. Enforcing current immigration law, which woul…

For New Zealand it's 25%, Australia 22%, the UK 14%, France 9%, Germany 12%, Canada 22%, the Netherlands 19% Frankly 15% is about average for Western Countries

I think talking about averages is somewhat misleading. There has been a steep upward trend in the US and Europe. In the 1960s we'd be talking about less than 5% for the US and Europe so that is a big change. It's fair to say that there have been major policy changes over the past 50 years but it's misleading -- I'm not accusing you, just pointing out -- to say it's an average because that implies a steady state.

I don't think USA/EU is at 15% yet. Europe trends just a little less than the USA (at least from 2016). I was just skimming this article today (below). I may have misinterpreted it so feel free to set the record straight. See Fig 1.

Peri, G. 2016. Immigrants, Productivity, and Labor Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(4): 3–30.

Canada and Australia have had very high rates for a long time. Australia's is higher though. I'm not sure why Peri chose to combine the series because they are quite different but higher than the US.

The AU/NZ (and Canada too I suppose) cases are interesting because they all have very overheated housing markets and prices are historically high relative to average wages. The USA went through a market correction and let the housing bubble burst but these markets did not. I've heard it argued that increased immigration to major housing markets is considered to be one way to keep the construction industry and house/rent prices sustainable. I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts or insight into this.

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#19

Post by carapace »

What was that? Hitler was a vegetarian?

FWIW, the environment really is the ultimate non-partisan issue and I think we are about one or two heat waves or water shortages away from finding that out.

This made me think we'll see unilateral geoengineering by e.g Bangladesh before it gets too hot: https://spaswell.wordpress.com/2016/11/18/dr-gwynne-dyer-geo...

I don't think there's anything intrinsically authoritarian in ecology, if anything evolution is anarchy, but I can entertain (and be dismayed by) the thought that e.g. Chinese Communism may turn out to be the successful system in a hundred years. Recall "How is China able to provide enough food to feed over 1B people?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20537409 that describes regenerative ecological farm systems.

Re: The Menace of Eco-Fascism (2018)

#20

Post by djaychela »

adrianN wrote: post #9
adventuretime wrote: post #4

Not surprised to see the left slowly distancing itself from environmentalism (save climate hysteria), given the coming African population bomb: http://theconversation.com/theres-a-strong-chance-that-one-t... 4.5 billion Africans by 2100 will mean ecological devastation the likes of which we've never seen, and traditional environmentalism will increasingly prove difficult to reconcile with anti-racism.

If we haven't learned how to live sustainably by 2100, we'll have wrecked the planet anyway. Future environmentalism will likely be about helping developing countries skip the extremely polluting stage of development.

I think that many 'carbon offset' payments work by paying for less polluting technology to be installed in developing countries in the method you describe.
Post reply on HN