Posted on 09/21/2019 2:13:35 AM PDT by Libloather
Once confined to the small scientific community of climate researchers and ecological economists, the idea of degrowth is now blazing into the mainstream. Not surprisingly, people are trying to figure out what to make of it. Is it an inspiring idea that points the way to a better economy? Or is it a mad notion that’s sure to plunge us all into poverty?
Degrowth is a planned reduction of total energy and material use to bring the economy in line with planetary boundaries, while improving people’s lives by distributing income and resources more fairly.
The scientific case for degrowth is robust, and gets stronger every day. We know that high-income nations - including Britain and Ireland - must make dramatic and very rapid reductions to their emissions in order to avert dangerous climate breakdown, cutting carbon at a rate of about 15 per cent per year. This will require a massive mobilisation to roll out all the solar panels, wind turbines and nuclear power stations we need to get to net zero.
But there’s a problem. Because high-income nations consume so much energy, it may not be feasible to generate renewables quickly enough to stay within a fast-shrinking carbon budget. According to climate researchers, the only way to make it work is to reduce total energy use.
(Excerpt) Read more at irishtimes.com ...
“Degrowth” would would work best by depopulating (murdering) 36,000,000 over-consuming innocent citizens. We can call it “The Great Leap Forward!”
Degrowth, allowing the dictators of the world what they need to conquer the world
either reads like peoples cube or pol pot, not sure
The Georgia Guidestones bear a globalist environmentalist manifesto calling for a worldwide population of 500 million. Think about how you’d get there.
American Stonehenge: Monumental Instructions for the Post-Apocalypse
https://www.wired.com/2009/04/ff-guidestones/?currentPage=1
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones
Creepy as hell.
Wake me up when China signs on and leads the way by example … LOL.
Insanity on parade.
I suspect these scientists wouldn’t tolerate any degrowth for their grant funding.
distributing income and resources more fairly.
Basically communism in a green skirt.
Capitalism is the only system that is fair since the individual that takes the risk is the one getting the reward.
In socialism no one will take the risk and so there are no rewards to share.
scientific communism??
Yes. Yes, it is.
I note that the article is written by an anthropologist, and that no scientists are quoted or referenced anywhere. Furthermore, the article is nothing but a long list of socialist pipe dreams, of the type that promise utopia but deliver death and misery to the masses while the elites live in utter luxury.
I've never taken an anthropology class and do not know the field, but it looks to me like this anthropologist did not pay attention during the classes on how human societies grow and distribute resources in the most fair way to their members. And he does not know the concept of a normal distribution, which is a fundamental dynamic of any system.
Luddites, plus the dream of the Save the Planet Crowd - eliminate 90% of the plague of humanity and save Mother Earth.
My take on it is that they are trying to repackage a planned economy.
AKA - Communism.
Scientific Socialism
That was the term used by Marx.
Degrowth would do that, and more. A shrinking, more "planetary friendly" world economy wouldn't have the resources or aptitude for invention to confront crises.
They should start their experiment with de-growth by banning toilet paper to see how they really like it, before resorting to the usual Leftist mass murder tactics.
That sentence buried deep in the bowels of this excretable Marxist manifesto tells us volumes about these neo-Marxist climate change schemes.
Nathan Bedford announces another maxim: equity (equality) is the enemy of growth. In fact, equity (equality) is the enemy both of growth and of prosperity.
The converse is also true: inequality promotes growth and prosperity.
Inequality of wealth in and of itself is not a threat to a healthy society providing (note the italics) opportunity is relatively equal. In other words, the American experience, perhaps aided by the presence of the frontier, where every mother believed that her son could be president, resulted in the world's most prosperous nation but the South American experience, where opportunity was virtually eliminated for majority Indians and mestizos by monopoly white ownership of land, results in chronic poverty, misery, huge wealth differential, chronic revolutions, resorts to Marxist governments, tyranny and, of course, demands for redistribution of wealth.
One produces a virtuous circle, the other produces dystopia.
But how does an ambitious neo-Marxist obtain power in prosperous, relatively capitalist Western Europe and America?
One method, as we have seen, is to play the race card. Another method we are witnessing now involves apocalyptic visions of universal misery if capitalism is not surrendered to Big Brother in order to avoid catastrophic global warming. Andrew Yang adds a third, a dystopic vision of a world of grotesque wealth disparity brought on by technology.
This article advances a de-growth movement. The giveaway: all of these approaches generate a threat which they solve only by big government that betray the Marxist motivation. For example, if reducing carbon emissions would eliminate the problems of climate change an obvious solution is to advance nuclear power stations but this solution is anathema because it does not produce political power, only electrical power.
Steve Bannon and Elizabeth Warren propose different populist remedies for what they see as growing inequality running in favor of elites and against "the people." Warren thinks that the elites who operate as megacorporations need to be controlled by big government on behalf of the little people. Steve Bannon wants to undo government missteps involving immigration, endless fruitless wars, and crony capitalism to open up the doors of opportunity. A distinct difference between these two seems to be that Warren wants big government as a permanent institution and Bannon wants to use government on a much more limited basis, to undo what government has done, to open the doors of opportunity which big government has shut.
These two paradigms will be at war with each other in the 2020 election with two twists. Warren will add the race card and Trump will articulate the Bannon vision in his own unique style which will galvanize the electorate to a new way of thinking and voting-just as he did in 2016. In other words Trump will advance Bannon's populist message but in his own words according to the Trump brand.
Equality of opportunity is really an application of individual liberty. Equality of wealth is really a collectivist nightmare because at the end of the day it means only a platoon change of elites with even more power but it is a seductive piece of election bait for immigrants who have never lived in an opportunity culture or for graduates of the American public school system who have been conditioned not to believe the evidence of their own eyes.
My first visit to Red China was in 1980...my most recent was in 2016. On both occasions I visited a major city called Guangzhou which is a couple of hours north of Hong Kong.On my first visit the city looked just like you'd imagine any Soviet city to look...drab,primitive and straight out of the 1700s. Back then morning rush hour consisted of a few Soviet style limos (for the powerful,no doubt),a number of primitive looking buses and about 900,000 bicycles. On my most recent visit I saw glass and steel skyscrapers and about 900,000 Kias,Hondas and Buicks.
Given that China is BY FAR the worst polluter in the world...responsible for AT LEAST half of the cr@p that's in the air (and water)...we should just reduce China to its 1980 state...or maybe even 1930.
World pollution...SOLVED!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.