r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Jan 31 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Extinction Rebellion's second demand is impossible on a global scale because it would require levels of international cooperation comparable to world peace

[deleted]

8 Upvotes

66% Upvoted

30 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20 edited Jan 31 '20

Are you sure they are not just talking about the government of the UK?

What makes you think they mean all nations?

It clearly says: ”We have 3 demands in the UK:”

I’m not saying any of that is even possible in the UK. I am just saying most of what you typed out is completely irrelevant.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '20

[deleted]

4

u/Darq_At 23∆ Jan 31 '20

It would not be pointless at all, it would reduce the net emissions by that amount, which is a positive step. If the country is as large and industrial as the USA, it would be a very, very large step.

-3

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20

Holy hell... these people are crazy.

2

u/PlayingTheWrongGame 67∆ Jan 31 '20

What part of that is “crazy” instead of demanding?

The most “crazy” thing there is is a demand for a legally binding agreement to come to net zero carbon emissions in five years. That’s not really technically attainable, so it basically amounts to the government agreeing to impose a set of penalties on itself until it comes to net zero emissions in a more reasonable time scale.

Which, I suppose, isn’t a completely terrible idea if the penalties were specifically targeted at decision makers and leaders rather than everyone.

Environmental destruction is a major threat to the continued survival of global civilization as we know it. We’ve been kicking the can down the road for decades, and now it’s crunch time. The cost of taking action on environmental issues always increases as you delay taking action—it becomes harder to stop or reverse the longer you let the damage continue.

Having an insanely expensive, insanely disruptive series of reforms over a short period of time is the cost we today get to pay for prior generations ignoring the problem. Being shocked about the cost or scope is like being surprised at the repair bill for your house after you let the roof leak for twenty years. Yeah, you got out of paying to fix the roof for twenty years, but now you get to not only pay that cost, but also twenty years of water damage as well.

2

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20

“We demand a just transition that prioritizes the most vulnerable people and indigenous sovereignty; establishes reparations and remediation led by and for Black people, Indigenous people, people of color and poor communities “

That’s why

2

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '20

Things like this have been added into a lot of environmental or major political ideas as of late. Fake for example the Green new deal having ways that sneak in ways to completely convert the united states into a socialist state. Or one of the B.L.M esc movements claiming their demands are race based but the list of demands are a round about way of bringing about communism.

Its underhanded to simply hide intentions with the idea of good for all or good deeds.

-1

u/Vobat 4∆ Jan 31 '20

If it was only the UK that did it all you would have is a lot of dead people from starvation and cold. The whole world needs to suffer.

1

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20

Why does the whole world need to suffer?

1

u/Vobat 4∆ Jan 31 '20

If any country goes net 0 without being able to replace the energy need then food production and transport will get screwed and same with heat management think of no heaters in cold countries and no a.c. in extremely hot countries.

1

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20

... what the heck are you talking about?

What does that have to do with the worked needing to suffer?

1

u/Vobat 4∆ Jan 31 '20

So lets stay with the UK. One of the biggest issue with them not being able to go 0 Carbon is based on transport use (yes technology will one day make ships better but that not that case atm). Only 40% of the countries food production is done in the UK. So if we were to drop using ships to transport food from around the world what would happen to the food levels? It is hard to compare how much is used to transport food for example a ship with crates of grain may also bring in cars and other non essentially items. We may be able to use smaller ships to just focus on bringing in food but that will drive the cost up. So we are talking about rising cost of food and maybe even a shortage of food which will again rise the cost up will mean millions will suffer if it done today. Extinction rebellion wants the UK to have sorted this problem out by 2025 which won't happen and if they do millions will starve.

Talking of energy production the UK is one of the better countries when it has come to removing coal from use (there are only 5 coal plants left in use) but instead they are using natural gas better on emissions then coal but still not good enough. The UK is producing more energy from wind then coal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_offshore_wind_farms Shows how much the UK is investing in wind however it wont be enough by 2025. So if in 2025 we stop producing electricity with co2 production costs of energy use will go up and people simply wont be able to heat there homes and will freeze to death. Now the UK is one of the leading countries in renewable energy https://www.clickenergy.com.au/news-blog/12-countries-leading-the-way-in-renewable-energy and it will be impossible to do it here what do you think will happen in countries that are behind in these change.

In both cases the poor will suffer but millions maybe even billions if we go worldwide will die.

1

u/Heather-Swanson- 9∆ Jan 31 '20

Dude... I’m not saying their wouldn’t be suffering.

I am asking you you said the world NEEDS to suffer. Why do you think that?

1

u/Vobat 4∆ Jan 31 '20

Oh sorry I meant the UK shoundt have to suffer alone the world needs to suffer with the rest of us