Okay so I was scrolling through the PSL’s info page, and it is stated that they are to denuclearize the power grid. Why is this? I was under the impression that Nuclear Energy is the much more sustainable and frankly realistic source of power–even without Molten Salt Reactors and Thorium based ones.

 Im finding it most orgs tend to stay away from Nuclear energy due to fear mongering from fossil fuel industries; Thus its stain in the imperial core, reaching from liberals to western "leftists". But I am surprised the PSL, a radical organization, is anti-nuclear.

   FYI this isn't a deal breaker or anything--they seem to be taking the lead for vanguard party--just was curious of the stance on nuclear energy.
  • @CITRUSOP
    10•1 year ago

    Thanks for the history! Im guessing this can be easily fixed with education, hell i might compile an essay myself. As others have said, a nuclear base with renewables to subsidize energy seems the way to go.

    Overall I need to dig into it more for specifics, but my main point will be: You can have a nuclear power plant with a sound system that only plays Fallout Music! Who’d say no to that?! 🤣

    • @knfrmity
      9•1 year ago

      It’s both an “easy” fix as well as a really difficult one, much the same as teaching liberals about Marxism-Leninism. They’re on board with the core principles, but as soon as you tell them what the topic is that you’re talking about they’re immediately 9000% against you.

      If you’re interested in sources I’m sure I can still dig up a few. Unfortunately most of the authors are imperial core libs but their historical investigations and analyses of opposition to nuclear power still seem pretty solid.

      • @CITRUSOP
        2•1 year ago

        Id love some sources!

        Yeah saying it was "easy" was probably relative, lol. I have found it that saying something along the lines of "Hey man if you don't think you're up to it, you don't have to learn what i have to say" sorta tricks them into having an open mind. 

Now Im curious how those in the PSL and other MLs would react?(no pun intended).  Are they not used to analyzing everything with critical thinking? Would explaining to MLs be difficult?
        • @knfrmity
          5•1 year ago

          Of all political persuasions MLs should be the easiest to bring around to a new evidence based point of view. I’m not so familiar with PSL (different country for starters) but I don’t get the sense that members are majority MLs.

          Sources (caution, most are quite liberal and some authors have dug into pmc shitlibism more recently):

          mothersfornuclear.org

          thoughtscapism.com

          environmentalprogress.org/Energy as well as Michael Schellenberger’s work on nuclear power specifically. Otherwise he’s really insufferable.

          withouthotair.com Really interesting book on energy density and generation possibilities. Tech wise this book is unfortunately over a decade old, due in part to the author’s sudden passing. That being said, energy tech hasn’t improved in the orders-of-magnitude way it would need to in order to change the conclusions of the book.

          And there is a web-published book which I am not finding anymore which disassembles an influential paper arguing that 100% renewable energy mix isn’t realistic. It’s based off the same concepts of energy density and scale explored in Without Hot Air and IIRC was released as sort of an addendum to this academic rebuttal: https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1610381114

          • @CITRUSOP
            3•1 year ago

            Appreciate the sources and nuggets of info, Comrade knfrmity!

            I will agree PSL does not seem to have majority ML numbers-- tho some more radical tendencies are overshadowed by their demsocish aesthetic-- but its a start for a US party. I myself am too young to join any party–and frankly too poor–but its important for me to keep up with any organized left here, and navigate between myself and others into a real struggle in the Empire.