A shorter version of my latest column

-Hayes Brown, Bluesky

Transcription / Alt Text:
Panel one: [off-screen] Fox News: Taylor Swift’s plane is emitting soo much carbon Angry Goose: Why are carbon emissions bad? Panel 2: [Man labeled Fox News being chased] Goose: Explain why carbon emissions are bad, coward!!!

  • htrayl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    10 months ago

    *It is definitely not too late to mitigate a ton of suffering. *

    I’ve said it elsewhere: environmental nihilism is deeply unethical. There is a ton we can do to minimize damage and restore the environment.

    • Redderik
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s such a simple comment, but this resonated in a way that hit me. I feel like I’m an environmental nihilist, and looking at it as unethical rather than just being a result of hopelessness is a totally different way to reframe this. It’s motivating to keep trying to make a difference!

    • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      We have to keep trying of course, but we also have to hedge our bets and plan for the worst. There is a lot we can do on a community level or city level or sometimes on a small nation level.

      But globally it’s dangerous to think that what has been happening isn’t going to continue to happen. The political and media situation today is actually worse than it was 20 or 30 years ago. Economic power has further consolidated. Media is worse than ever. The climate protest are being managed all over the world with improved science for propaganda. AI is going to make it worse still, by being able to generate localized just in time strategies for every community.

      In the end it didn’t matter if climate change is anthropogenic or not, we are apparently not an intelligent civilization. Meaning on a global scale we simply cannot act intelligent, but more like a slime mold, always moving towards where food or energy (money) is.

      We should try to minimize damage locally and create resilient communities or societies or nations. But the catastrophes, billions of refugees, climate wars and genocides are something we have to plan for. Nobody knows where and how bad it’s going to be. Regional nuclear war isn’t unlikely. We have to try to anticipate the chaos and plan for it - and if you can, get out of the way sooner than later. Great Britain is an example of an island that can sustain itself and maintain a civilized society. Or Ireland or Island. While Russia has so many borders to problematic areas it will almost certainly be complete chaos. Europe is going to be a shitshow too, while the USA of course is the big winner: A huge country with only two boarders.

      As for environmental concerns, we should try to “terraform” or transplant ecosystems as temperatures change. Because the change is far too fast for nature to migrate (plus artificial barriers today). So that is an important strategy for preservation. The other thing we should do is collect seeds and genetic samples and digitize data and create long lasting archives to preserve them for the future.

      Hopefully we survive and eventually learn not to do it again. See, I’m not a nihilist ;) Or maybe it won’t be that bad and we somehow muddle through.