World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
The difference is that capitalism by its nature requires the degradation of the environment. Capitalism, by definition, needs to increase profits year after year. Unlimited growth is impossible in a finite planet with limited technology without degrading the environment, so capitalism simply ignores the climate in its quest for higher profits. After all, you can't risk getting outcompeted by another company which will be less afraid of abusing nature.
Socialism, on the other hand, doesn't need perpetual growth. The objective isn't infinite profit, the objective is higher living quality for people, which doesn't necessarily rely on increased material wealth, especially not in a context of degrading climate which negatively affects the quality of life of people. It doesn't mean socialism doesn't have to work hard to prevent degrading nature, it just means that it's not a necessary logical consequence of socialism whereas it is of capitalism.
You talk about historical proof. The reality is that historically, the groups concerned by climate change have consistently been to the left of the political spectrum, whereas the right wing (capitalism's most loyal defenders) doesn't seem to care. For 36 years we've had an International Panel on Climate Change (though ExxonMobil had reports of Climate Change being manmade since the early 70s and hid them), and for 36 years scientists have been saying the same: we're not doing enough. What's been the response of capitalist governments everywhere? "We shall continue not doing enough". How many years of capitalism in all countries failing to step up to the problem do you need to realize that capitalism simply has no incentives to solve this problem because it's fundamentally an antidemocratic system, in which the interests of a few in the owning class are held above those of the working class?
You could argue that what we have isnt true capitalism, since our current system doesnt include the environmental cost. If we could do that, then the cost of doing things would greatly increase, thus forcing capitalism to be more environmentally friendly.
I dont want to defend capitalism, but there is a potential version of capitalism that could work. Kinda how we use the replicative aggressive function of viruses for healing.
The fact that in the West, right wings are often insane, doesnt mean much. 95% of new coal power plants are built in China. Are they right wing? I think they are but tankies think China is socialist.
Obviously China has immense demand for power and it is in many ways a developing country. They took some measures to reduce the negative environmental effect. Their cities were covered in smog till recently, they had to do something.
But despite that, they still value the growth/wealth of cheap electric power.
No, I couldn't. Capitalism doesn't need to account for every externality to be capitalism.
We've been trying for 36 years with no result. That's exactly my point. The people who benefit from the lack of account of externalities are the ones in control of the system.
That version of capitalism is "let's make the public opinion guided by the scientific research make the environmental decisions". At that point, why stop with accounting for externalities and planning the economy as a whole in a democratic fashion? Why this obsession with maintaining capitalism?
You got it. You can't expect a developing county to rely on new and expensive tech instead of cheap and reliable one during the process of industrialization. But currently, China is by far the country installing most renewables. I personally don't consider China to be very socialist, but saying they're right wing is far from the truth as well.
The problem with capitalism as well, is the competition not only between companies, but between geopolitical blocks. You can't expect China or the US to degrow when they're geopolitical enemies that are in theory threated by each other. In reality, the US is the main threatener, followed by Russia, since they're both heavily capitalist and imperialist countries with opposing interests and different capitalists who fight each other for supremacy. Unless we eliminate these capitalist threats of geopolitical fights by transcending to worldwide socialism, degrowth simply will not occur, and climate deals that harm the economy of countries won't be agreed on.