F(D)F - Futile Discourse Friday: Man vs. Nature OR Man vs. Himself? (376 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 1.41 on 24 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Marginwalker (View user info) at 2007-02-02 15:44:14 EST
The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) released their Fourth Assessment Report on climate change earlier today (See Links Below), so I spent the morning tuning into AM radio talk shows discussing the issue.
After listening to countless opinions of people from every walk of life, I've concluded the following:
This issue needs to be stripped of politics.
Period.
This should not be a political campaign.
It should not be about "Liberals/Democrats" vs. "Conservatives/Republicans", nor the
"free market capitalists" vs the "bleeding heart pinkos".
It's really not even an issue of "Public" vs "Private" - as both sectors are affected indefinitely.
As a proponent and true lover of all things political, it's not often such things escape my lips, but there's obviously bigger factors at play:
There is a much, much bigger picture.
This is MANKIND -
irregardless of race, gender, religion, political designation, personal belief system, sexual orientation, etc -
vs. NATURE.
Demographics are trivial, and focusing on them only muddles the process of reaching unified resolution. Much more important than any minor distinctions is the fact we all inhabit the same planet - yet we repeatedly focus on that which seperates us.
People need to get over personal differences, and start to focus on common interests.
Seriously - sometimes I wonder which REALLY poses the bigger threat:
Global warming or Human Ego.
?
http://www.ipcc.ch/
http://www.empreinte.com/richmediaevent/20070202/vod/ipc_audio_en_900x540_WindowsLD.htm
User Reviews
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-03 12:35:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2007-02-03 12:22:03 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:59:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
Fuck it. I'd love to see scientists replace the majority of politicians. I'll listen to what a scientist tells me more than what a politician tells me.
*********
*swoons*
I'm a scientist.
Sort of.
I know SPSS.
-------------------------
You're in, Kid.
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2007-02-03 12:22:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:59:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
Fuck it. I'd love to see scientists replace the majority of politicians. I'll listen to what a scientist tells me more than what a politician tells me.
*********
*swoons*
I'm a scientist.
Sort of.
I know SPSS.
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-03 12:16:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
ps Fuckthearmy - thank you for your intelligent reply.
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-03 12:13:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FuckTheArmy (user info) at 2007-02-03 06:17:57 (#)
Ranking: 0
The problem, of course, that anyone who doesn't oppose all of *capitalism* (the social system we have where profit is the fundamental motive) doesn't stand a chance of actually stopping the destruction of the planet.
Biodiesel is produced most cheaply by cutting down swamps and producing more greenhouse gases than regular oil.
Destruction = $ $ $
This is a political, economic, and social problem and therefore requires a political, economic, and social response.
It is therefore indeed a left-versus-right issue, though the Democrats aren't any better than Republicans in my eyes. They tend to co-opt progressive movements into voting for a 'lesser evil'.
-------------------------------------------------------
Believe me - I'm not dismissing the political facet as unimportant. I'm very aware of the how the approach to the problem (and the political/economicial motives lending to it) shifts as we move across the political spectrum.
That's painfully obvious.
My point was merely that inorder to adequeately address the problem, middle ground has GOT to be mestablished between the two ends (IE free market capitalism and full-out socialism)
It cannot be a matter of relying on "either side" to take the reins:
Face it - no one is going to be gung-ho about handing the country over to a bunch of heavy-taxing lefties in the name of saving the planet; especially considering how badly the idea of socialism/communism was smeared and misrepresented to Americans, not to mention the rest of the world. (Not that we've ever even seen Communism/Socialism in it's truest form. It always tends to take on the characteristics of a fascist dictatorship)
On the other end, the power and force of the economy - ESPECIALLY since it has become globalized - cannot be halted. Therefore, tackling climate change cannot rely on the abolishment of the free market - it's inconcievable and cannot be done. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. If the attitude of the Consumer could be altered to think in more economical/environmentally-friendly terms, big business would be ENCOURAGED to produce accordingly.
So though the market is currently encouraged to produce in a way that is damaging to the environment, it's only reflecting the demands of the consumers - being you and I and every other layperson.
The attitude and purchasing habits of the consumers control the direction of the market, so the answer lies in WHAT is being demanded. The attitude of consumers HAS to be changed before real ground can be made.
So in my mind, inviting both sides to see eye to eye is NOT the core problem. The core problem is we're destroying our planet. If we want to do something about it, we have to see beyond surface problems such as this, stop pinning the blame on the government and big business, and take the issue into our OWN hands.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2007-02-03 11:03:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:35:26 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:14:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
Did I hear that you're a broad?
If so, do you need my email address to send me some naked body shots?
-------------------------------------------------------------
What's is worth to you, kiddo?
This "broad" doesn't come cheap.
Shlongy doesn't PAY for this kind of stuff...There's a line waiting to send me some saucy snapshots.
Submitted by FuckTheArmy (user info) at 2007-02-03 06:17:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
The problem, of course, that anyone who doesn't oppose all of *capitalism* (the social system we have where profit is the fundamental motive) doesn't stand a chance of actually stopping the destruction of the planet.
Biodiesel is produced most cheaply by cutting down swamps and producing more greenhouse gases than regular oil.
Destruction = $ $ $
This is a political, economic, and social problem and therefore requires a political, economic, and social response.
It is therefore indeed a left-versus-right issue, though the Democrats aren't any better than Republicans in my eyes. They tend to co-opt progressive movements into voting for a 'lesser evil'.
Submitted by whiskey_jack (user info) at 2007-02-02 19:17:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Hmmm maybe if we were to nuke the planet to show it we mean business it would stop acting the fool and stop heating up.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:42:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
It's funny how people can't see the obvious solution - I can fix global warming in 60 minutes. Seriously.
(well, I'd also have to be President of the United States - I would need access to the appropriate tools.)
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:35:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I LOVE this for a new tradition, by the way. FTF.
(I have to finish a metric assload of work that has been piling up during my 'play period' here at uber today... but I will come back to this later. Promise.)
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:34:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:31:45 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2007-02-02 16:33:06 (#)
Ranking: 2
This issue needs to be stripped of politics.
---
She is right. Unfortunately that will not happen as long as corporations with financial interests that are contraryto the desire to protect the environmet are the ones who put politicians in power.
--------------------------------
DING DING DING
And that's why - as potentially liberating and positive it is - Capitalism IS NOT the most effective economic system amidst a greedy, grossly over-populated society. We need some checks in place.
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:32:04 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:59:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
At the same time though, you can't be eaten up with guilt over Brand X politician getting elected.
Politicians are by their very nature slimy bastards/bastardesses. They can and do flip on you.
I, in good faith, vote for a politician who I don't think will destroy more of the environment. He/She gets in office. A year later they reverse their stand and approve drilling on previously protected land.
What do you do then? "Pardon me, dear chap, would you mind terribly getting the fuck out of office?"
It would be nice if we could do that in real life and not just in theory. We have to wait and vote them the hell out. By then, an assload of damage has been done. So we vote another slimy bastard in office and hold our breath.
Fuck it. I'd love to see scientists replace the majority of politicians. I'll listen to what a scientist tells me more than what a politician tells me.
------------------------------------------------------
I'm totally with you about the sciences. At least then, theoretically, there would be less chance for religious zealots to be thrown within the realm of politics.
There's definitely formal processes we have to utilize inorder to choose the men/women we THINK are best suited for representing our interests - but as you stated - they're terribly ineffective, and hardly demand an ounce of accountability on the part of the elected.
I just think we need a new method, and to reach that point, we have to do away with the old one!
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:31:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2007-02-02 16:33:06 (#)
Ranking: 2
This issue needs to be stripped of politics.
---
She is right. Unfortunately that will not happen as long as corporations with financial interests that are contraryto the desire to protect the environmet are the ones who put politicians in power.
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:26:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
(I absolutely agree with almost everything that Forensic girl is saying... but don't tell her that - she hates me.)
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:24:46 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
amen sister!
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:15:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2007-02-02 18:11:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
When I clicked on this I thought it was about Doug Flutie. I read it and you never mentioned him. I was disappointed.
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:59:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
At the same time though, you can't be eaten up with guilt over Brand X politician getting elected.
Politicians are by their very nature slimy bastards/bastardesses. They can and do flip on you.
I, in good faith, vote for a politician who I don't think will destroy more of the environment. He/She gets in office. A year later they reverse their stand and approve drilling on previously protected land.
What do you do then? "Pardon me, dear chap, would you mind terribly getting the fuck out of office?"
It would be nice if we could do that in real life and not just in theory. We have to wait and vote them the hell out. By then, an assload of damage has been done. So we vote another slimy bastard in office and hold our breath.
Fuck it. I'd love to see scientists replace the majority of politicians. I'll listen to what a scientist tells me more than what a politician tells me.
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:37:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:19:08 (#)
Ranking: 2
To me it's always been mankind REFUSING to live in harmony with nature and fucking up the entire ecosystem's homeostatsis because mankind doesn't give a shit about anything other than mankind.
How long have the world's scientists warned us about this?
Did we listen?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Most of the fault lies with politicians. ALL politicians. ALL over the world.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Though I agree with a lot of what you say - who's reponsible for putting those politicians IN positions of power? In a large way - it's you and I. Thus it's OUR responsibility to break the mechanism when they start fucking things up.
We can't pass the buck off.
Submitted by marginwalker (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:35:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:14:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
Did I hear that you're a broad?
If so, do you need my email address to send me some naked body shots?
-------------------------------------------------------------
What's is worth to you, kiddo?
This "broad" doesn't come cheap.
Submitted by forensicgirl3 (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:19:08 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
To me it's always been mankind REFUSING to live in harmony with nature and fucking up the entire ecosystem's homeostatsis because mankind doesn't give a shit about anything other than mankind.
How long have the world's scientists warned us about this?
Did we listen?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Most of the fault lies with politicians. ALL politicians. ALL over the world.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2007-02-02 17:14:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Did I hear that you're a broad?
If so, do you need my email address to send me some naked body shots?
Submitted by St_Jimmy (user info) at 2007-02-02 16:54:08 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
D'oh! English! Who needs that? I'm never going to England. Come on,
let's smoke.
-- Homer Simpson, talking Barney into cutting class
The Way We Was
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2007-02-02 16:52:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Paging rob_berg, rob_berg to the white courtesy phone please.
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2007-02-02 16:33:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This issue needs to be stripped of politics.
Period.