As with almost every statistic, if you’re not measuring per capita, your basically just measuring population. Convenient blindness to that suggests you’re acting in bad faith.
I mean that still dodges the point but to yours, I don’t ignore the history, I think the actions and rapid industrialization of the USSR and China lead to incomprehensible suffering. I also don’t think it’s a valid comparison especially given the modern context has China doing a lot of work in the global transition to renewables.
What you do seem to ignore is that systems beyond capitalism are just as likely to pollute. Per capita pollution may have more to do with poverty than altruism. China is trying real hard to catch up…
Because all of these things take place in a world’s history of context, I don’t agree it suggests they are just as likely to pollute.
I think all political systems have the propensity to pollute, especially with the energy availability of fossil fuels, but where I would disagree and why I think it’s isn’t a good faith argument is that you’re framing China as trying to catch up in per capita pollution when they are so very clearly not given the amount of work they are doing solar, nuclear, railroads, EVs.
I also agree that this is not exclusively altruism, and that divorcing themselves from oil is also a means to disconnect the global economy from the petrodollar, but I don’t really see this as a point against it.
As with almost every statistic, if you’re not measuring per capita, your basically just measuring population. Convenient blindness to that suggests you’re acting in bad faith.
And speaking of blindness, ignoring the history of communism is your version of bad faith…
I mean that still dodges the point but to yours, I don’t ignore the history, I think the actions and rapid industrialization of the USSR and China lead to incomprehensible suffering. I also don’t think it’s a valid comparison especially given the modern context has China doing a lot of work in the global transition to renewables.
What you do seem to ignore is that systems beyond capitalism are just as likely to pollute. Per capita pollution may have more to do with poverty than altruism. China is trying real hard to catch up…
Because all of these things take place in a world’s history of context, I don’t agree it suggests they are just as likely to pollute.
I think all political systems have the propensity to pollute, especially with the energy availability of fossil fuels, but where I would disagree and why I think it’s isn’t a good faith argument is that you’re framing China as trying to catch up in per capita pollution when they are so very clearly not given the amount of work they are doing solar, nuclear, railroads, EVs.
I also agree that this is not exclusively altruism, and that divorcing themselves from oil is also a means to disconnect the global economy from the petrodollar, but I don’t really see this as a point against it.
Huh weird response for someone who is righteous