A tourist has posted “staggering” photos of himself and his wife at the same spot in the Swiss Alps almost exactly 15 years apart, in a pair of photos that highlight the speed with which global heating is melting glaciers.
Duncan Porter, a software developer from Bristol, posted photos that were taken in the same spot at the Rhone glacier in August 2009 and August 2024. The white ice that filled the background has shrunk to reveal grey rock. A once-small pool at the bottom, out of sight in the original, has turned into a vast green lake.
“Not gonna lie, it made me cry,” Porter said in a viral post on social media platform X on Sunday night.
Everyone in this sub agrees that climate change is a disastrous event, and that we’re not doing enough. But as soon as you suggest changing to a system that actually may do something against it, you guys drop the t-word like there’s no tomorrow.
Edit: to all of you fellas downvoting me, I have a message. Don’t worry, we will surely defeat climate change by reforming capitalism against the interests of those controlling the media and our politicians through their vast wealth, as we’ve been achieving for the past 20 years in which the CO2 emissions have been reducing exponentially!
What’s the T word?
Starts with “t”, rhymes with the Sumerian god of water and patron God of the city of Eridu “Enki”.
What’s the t-word?
Is it titties? It’s titties, isn’t it?
I wish it was tiddies, m8
I genuinely don’t know what the t-word is, though. I’m not feeling extra smart right now. Please feel free to help me out here.
I explained in a funny way to another fella: it starts with “t”, and rhymes with the Sumerian god of water and patron of the city or Eridu, “Enki”.
While capitalism is a big accelerator of climate change, socialism could do the same. Whether you exploit the environment for capitalist profit or the perceived profit of human society, the end result can be the same.
All animals want to exploit nature for their benefit, even if it is a short term benefit but a long term loss. Humans, and arguebly capitalism, are just more efficient. But here is an infamous example of socialism fucking the environment
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea
PS People’s issue isnt with socialism, it’s with supporting authoritative regimes, that dont even claim to be socialist(Russia for example)
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.