
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful” – John Mitchell, Chief Research Scientist British MET
Capitalism can crack climate change. But only if it takes risks
Larry Elliott
Thu 16 Aug 2018 15.00 AESTAnglo-Saxon capitalism’s drive to maximise profits in the short term won’t save the planet. Perhaps the Chinese model can?
…
But by the time they do, it could be too late. Capitalism – especially the dominant Anglo-Saxon variant of capitalism – has trouble thinking beyond the here and now. People running big corporations see their job as maximising profits in the short term, even if that means causing irreparable damage to the world’s ecosystem. What’s more, they think they should be free to get on with maximising profits without any interference from politicians, even though the fight against climate change can only be won if governments show leadership, individually and collectively.
…
Winning the race against time requires political leadership. It means acknowledging that the Chinese model of managed and directed capitalism might be more appropriate than the Anglo-Saxon model. A massive scaling up of investment in clean technology is needed, because the $300bn spent on decarbonisation worldwide last year merely matched the cost of the losses in the US from climate and weather-related events. It also means scaling up the lending of the World Bank and the regional development banks to help poorer countries build wind and solar capacity. And a global carbon tax set high enough so that fossil fuels remain in the ground must be implemented.
And, more than anything, it means accepting that the world needs to wage war against climate change. Powerful vested interests will say there is plenty of time to act, and they are aided by climate-change deniers who say there is nothing to worry about. These people need to be called out. They are not deniers, they are climate-change appeasers. And they are just as dangerously misguided as fascism’s appeasers in the 1930s.
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/16/capitalism-climate-change-risks-profits-china
In my opinion repeated praise of the Chinese system by climate scientists and greens is a terrific illustration of what is wrong with climate science.
The observation is that China has hideous pollution problems and rapidly growing CO2 emissions. But the political model greens cling to suggests that Chinese authoritarians could sweep these issues aside by decree – the objections of “climate appeasers” could be swept aside by naked force, the objections of “climate deniers” could be crushed by an authoritarian regime which does not tolerate dissent.
One question – why hasn’t this already happened?
The reason of course is because this naive vision of absolute authority which answers to nobody is not how China works. Yes authoritarians in China do regularly trample on the rights of others – but that trampling is frequently done in the name of making a quick profit, to silence the objections of people whose communities have just been turned into a toxic chemical cesspit by ruthless, well connected corporatists.
Western democracies are far better custodians of the environment, because under the Western system, people whose rights are being trampled by greedy corporatists have the power to vote for politicians who can right those injustices.
Greens continue to ignore this reality. Greens cling to their failed visions of an authoritarian climate revolution, because they refuse to consider observations which contradict their idealised political models. They cannot accept the possibility that they might be wrong.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Does that include the use of nerve gas to be used against enemies of the climate policy state?
“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful”
Definitely why our Walmart understocks items so often. Must be one of their credos these days.
Directed Capitalism.
A new cute name for Socialism.
Private ownership but government control.
The individual takes the risks but the government reaps the benefits.
“Greens cling to their failed visions of an authoritarian climate revolution, …”
Because they’re authoritarians at heart… watermelons, all of ’em!
What a surprise?!? Who would have suspected that the progressive Guardian would make common cause with the collectivist fascists in China?
In reality, there is very little difference between a fascist and a progressive.
“People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful” – John Mitchell, Chief Research Scientist British MET
Models are so much better because they can say anything you want them to. Observational evidence is just doesn’t cooperate and should be considered valueless. Sure, that’s science. NOT.
Richard Pryor: “Who you gonna believe? Me or your lyin’ eyes?’
I thought that was Groucho Marx.
Groucho might have said it too.
Are they aware that the Chinese stock market has lost 40% of its value the past 3 yrs, that China leads the world in building coal plants, and that pollution is terrible in China? No, they only focus on green energy investments, which are probably mostly bogus.
Since the Chinese government is part of the movement, declarations of intent are sufficient.
Sort of like Obama declaring that if is elected, the oceans will cease rising.
Yes, the Chinese are most efficient at control…..
WSJ–today
China’s Uighur Camps Swell as Beijing Widens the Dragnet
Satellite images show expansion of ‘re-education’ centers in China’s Xinjiang region
and this in Vietnam
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-vietnam-dissident-usa/us-concerned-by-vietnam-dissident-sentence-harsh-trend-idUSKBN1L21QH
Directed Capitalism at work: from Jo Nova 8/17/18 -“Solar boom to bust in China: worlds largest solar PV projects drop 43% as subsidies cut”
Big surprise. Another Progressive Supremacist is promoting tyranny for our own good.
I can think of many names to describe these defective people and their left wing movement.
But watching them panic & suffer into torment and violence as Trump appoints a SCOTUS that will stop them for decades is absolutely fantastic.
Green oligarchs show their true nature!
The correct term for this type of “economics” is Fascism. Once again this ugly form of government is raising its head in mainstream media in the EU, Britain, and the United States. This article reveals the true nature of the CAGW crowd. They put a name on others that exactly matches what they, themselves, believe.
Chinese attempts to manage corporations have only hurt its people economically. The economy of China is weak enough that the government suddenly wants to talk about a deal with our President. Besides ridiculous pollution in their cities, very little of the money generated by their form of Capitalism seems to get to the people living in the countryside.
The current environmental movement is in fact just a Trojan horse stuffed with two hundred years worth of the hideous collectivist scams that have (to date) resulted in the murder of hundreds of millions of people. I have been to China may times. I have seen a purple sunset in Qingdao and the fake stars they have created in Beijing by attaching LED lights to the tethers of helium balloons to give the people of that horrifically polluted city whatever pleasure one can get from gazing at fake stars.
Only an idiot or a wannabe tyrant would recommend adopting the Chinese model of environmental stewardship. I trust the The Guardian would not hire an idiot for an editor.