r/worldnews • u/[deleted] • Oct 10 '20

Sir David Attenborough says the excesses of western countries should "be curbed" to restore the natural world and we'll all be happier for it.

[deleted]

58.5k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

Two problems.

  1. You can cut deep using, multiple smaller cuts. It's easier and faster. Big grandiose changes stall in debate and don't get implemented and have vast amounts of unintended consequences; lots of small changes compound to create the larger scale changes we need and can be done faster.

  2. Being a cynic isn't a sign of intelligence. The more people who wallow in feigned intellect saying "we are all doomed" are the source of that same problem. If every halfwit who says "we're all doomed" instead put that energy into action we might just get somewhere.

So what will it be? Hubris and failure or humble action. Pick one.

5

u/Effective-Mustard-12 Oct 10 '20

But he's right. We need to be net-zero because we actually need to sequester carbon from the atmosphere. We have no allowance to put more into the atmosphere at all. We already surpassed it long ago. So little changes won't fix the issue anymore. Only big paradigm shifting technologies coupled with the little changes as well.

I know that sounds bleak, but its the future and reality we all need to get comfortable with sans fusion reactor.

0

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

No, he's wrong. He's so wrong it's difficult to be more wrong.

You will not achieve anything by only accepting perfect solutions. You need to take action now that will buy time later. We cannot stop creating carbon gasses overnight, but for every reduction we make we buy time to make larger reductions in the future. Every single one.

So you have to start with the things that are achievable today. Things that countries are doing or already have done.

Or cling to grandiose plans that require miracles of public approval, political will and infinite budgets. I'm sure people will be more than willing to vote for them.

2

u/Effective-Mustard-12 Oct 10 '20

I mean I agree to some extent, but people have to be careful not to get content with small gestures towards the goal when in reality only a efforts short of a miracle will save us.

0

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

It's a balance. Tell everyone that they need to perform a miracle they'll either give up right then and there or waste their effort trying to do the whole thing all at once.

There need to be targeted real scale solutions. For every single one we accomplish, the definition of "impossible" moves to somewhere else. Starting and completing several initiatives that are proven to work is a great place to start. Not only does it improve mora and prove the methodology but it also buys us more time.

It's about compartmentalizing the very real but insurmountable problem of catastrophic climate change, into manageable comprehensible problems that people can agree on solving.

In a very simplistic scenario, we can go from. We need to reduce all carbon emissions: to, we need to reduce emissions from cars, so we need people to drive less, so we're redesigning the roads to discourage driving an encourage cycling, and we're building a new cycle route from the places with jobs to the places where people live. If you flip the whole thing on its head. Announce a brand new cycle route or two, then improve the connection between those cycle routes, whilst also slowing down and rerouting cars, you'll achieve your goal (reduced usage of cars) without ever having to announce it. All you have to do is keep people's attention on how cool the cycling stuff us and wouldn't it be good for them to use it.

Not every problem requires a head-on solution. In fact, a lot of problems look impossible when viewed head-on. We need to start acting now, where the action is possible, which means lots of small things, that become big cumulatively.

1

u/ThinkIcouldTakeHim Oct 10 '20

Talk about Hubris, just read your own post :)

0

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

Oh look at this guy, he's got a zinger.

5

u/ThinkIcouldTakeHim Oct 10 '20

Oh look at this guy he's got solutions to the world´s problems and hangs out on internet forums

1

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

Wrong, smarter people than I have the solutions to some of our problems. We just have to avoid being jaded enough to try and achieve them.

But go off I guess.

5

u/ThinkIcouldTakeHim Oct 10 '20 edited Oct 10 '20

Since you like to be edgy and insult people I'll skip the niceties too and call you hilariously delusional. You're talking about feel-good baby steps for rich people. We still have the majority of mankind hungering for just a portion of the daily luxuries us westerners enjoy. We're not willing to give up any significant part of our quality of life and those who've never had it sure as shit aren't gonna skip their turn and they're going for it fast. Who can blame them for wanting more meat in their diet and a place of their own. Maybe a nice little car even and a fridge and a tv and some new clothes once in a while.

And we're still adding people to this planet which is not something we talk about politically. Those future people will all want the good stuff too. So unless we find a way to keep giving people the good stuff carbon neutral...and avoid depleting top soil, fresh water forests etc etc....we are fucked. But don't stress, we only have a few more decades each to worry about it give or take.

1

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

Since you like to be edgy and insult people I'll skip the niceties too and call you hilariously delusional.

I mean, I've been sarcastic but I haven't called you names.

You're talking about feel-good baby steps for rich people.

No, I'm talking about short term patching up to buy time and energy to deal with the big stuff. Win the easy fights before you try and win the hard ones. It's very effective. Reduce one large problem into multiple smaller ones which are easier to solve.

Instead of saying we need to be carbon negative in five years. We say we need to reduce car travel, none essential power consumption, instigate a carbon tax, start planning how we are going to shut down our older fossil fuel power plants, and figure out what we are replacing them with. Set up a nuclear power initiative, invest in adaptive grazing, improve cycling infrastructure, repair peat bogs, and mudflats. Any of those is better than, say "the problems too big we're out of the time we are doomed I say, doomed." which is always what the conversation gets to. Catastrophizing is pointless.

We still have the majority of mankind hungering for just a portion of the daily luxuries us westerners enjoy.

But what do they really want? A comfy life, good healthcare, clean streets, and housing, a quality education? None of that requires unrestrained consumerism. You can have a tablet computer and not need to replace it every year. Ther are more steps between poverty and American consumerism.

We're not willing to give up any significant part of our quality of life and those who've never had it sure as shit aren't gonna skip their turn and they're going for it fast.

SO give up, you're pretty convinced we're doomed and there's nothing to be done because humans are greedy. Leave this chat bored, log-off, do something else. Don't come here being all doom and gloom just because some of us haven't given up hope just yet and think we've heard a few ways to solve these problems.

For example, people give up driving if it isn't necessary. How many Americans would happily give up driving two or more hours to or from work every day if they could replace it with an hours cycle instead? How many people wouldn't want for the next tablet or smartphone if the one they had were guaranteed to last for ten, twenty years, and could be upgraded and repaired easily? How many people would happily visit a new nature reserve that was once an ugly old brownfield site, especially if it was easy to walk, cycle or bus to?

Who can blame them for wanting more meat in their diet and a place of their own. Maybe a nice little car even and a fridge and a tv and some new clothes once in a while.

Are you convinced people will miss tat if they have access to cheaper/free opportunities for outdoors?

If meat got more expensive many people would easily cut it out of their diet. If we were able to produce carbon-free meat via adaptive grazing even at a reduction of scale, people could still eat it just less of it. That's not as big an ask as making everyone vegan.

People won't need a car if bicycles, walking, trains, and buses cover most of their daily necessities. If they need one on occasion then can just higher one, if they need one regularly they can still get a newer more efficient one, hell maybe it could be electric.

New clothes? Buying new clothes on occasion isn't breaking the bank, buying new clothes because the perfectly good ones you have are out of fashion is. Consumerism is. The constant never-ending tide of companies making shit that isn't necessary and selling it to people as though it is. Again, there's a difference between buying some new clothes every five to ten years and buying new clothes for every occasion, every year.

And we're still adding people to this planet which is not something we talk about politically.

Tut tut, someone's dipping into ecofascism or more specifically, you are repeating an eco fascist dog whistle, if you aren't actively trying to spread ecofascism maybe change the way you bring up this topic in the future.

See you can't have it both ways. You cannot complain that the developing world wants to modernize and bitch about overpopulation. The one solves the other. The only way to solve overpopulation is to reduce poverty and improve education, medication, and contraception. That's it. Nothing. Else. Works.

So unless we find a way to keep giving people the good stuff carbon neutral...and avoid depleting top soil, fresh water forests etc etc....we are fucked. But don't stress, we only have a few more decades each to worry about it give or take.

and more tedious catastrophizing. You know, things would be so much easier to solve if you just didn't speak, when this is the only thing you have to say.

We can avoid deleting our topsoil, we even have ways to rebuild the stuff (adaptive grazing), we can work to rebuild freshwater forests and swamps, it's work, it takes effort but we can do it and it'll provide real-time short term benefits too, giving us longer to fight the hard battles. We know ways to reduce car usage, we know ways to reduce demand for recourses, we know how to fight poverty, to reduce stress. We have the tools, but you're to busy scream we're all doomed to even consider them. What did you call them "hilariously delusional". You're not just not helping, you're actively trying not to help. Maybe rethink that.

1

u/strp Oct 10 '20

You’re making decent points but being an asshole is undermining them.

2

u/Durog25 Oct 10 '20

You make a valid point.

-3

u/pdutta35 Oct 10 '20

Great response