I know very little about this subject. I had someone I know tell me a few months ago that for socialism to be sustainable, and to solve the climate crisis, U.S.ians are going to need to give up almost all A/C. They pointed out the fact that Amerikans are crybabies and even most of Western Europe does not use A/C.
However, with Greece and Spain recently having caught on fire and with heat waves devouring the nations, as well as stories regarding people in hotter regions in the U.S. dying from heat stroke in their own homes because they couldn’t afford their electricity bills, this read as sort of Maoist-lite, petty-bourgeois radicalism to me shifting blame on individuals when there are so many systemic industries contributing astronomically to the worsening climate. I was wondering, is A/C usage so detrimental as to necessitate its destruction? Should not the focus be on larger, more destructive industries and actually increasing the availability and affordability of A/C to hotter regions? Should scientific focus be moreso on creating a green A/C?
Like I said, almost no knowledge. Feel free to roast my ass (pun slightly intended).
Capitalist growth is reckless, socialist growth doesn’t have to be. The degrowth advocates, imo, are half-assing their theory and end up contradictory since they don’t push for the end of capitalist production but at the same time they want to destroy its fundamental driving force. Anyway that would never be done because of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
Great points. I prefer an optimistic and constructive socialism with focuses on innovation and tool-creation to deal with an ever-changing world than a destructive socialism with an emphasis on completely discarding many of the tools we have created. More proactive than reactive, if you will.
They confuse cause with effect because they cannot think outside capitalism, despite efforts.