How to say Marx was right without saying "Marx was right".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

In your car crash analogy, we are now past the point where hitting the brakes will help. The car will be irrepairably destroyed and all passengers will be killed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago*

    This is flat out wrong. In fact, the more co2 is emitted, the more extreme the consequences are. The change from 0->1 degree of global warming barely registers. The change from 3->4 degrees is catastrophical, for example.

    Thus, the warmer it gets, the more worth it is to fight against it, as each small win contributes more to the bottom line than in the beginning.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's why it's an analogy, and not reality.

    There is no point where hitting the brakes will not help. We can always reduce the amount of harm done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    The comforting fantasy is the idea that we can throw up our hands and say "We lost."

    Losing is easy. It demands nothing from us. Losing has no call to action. If we've lost, then there's no fight left to be fought.

    The reality is that the fight is always worth fighting. And that sucks, because it means we never get to give up. We never get to say "It's over", and stop caring. Caring is a lot harder.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I think we're past the point of the car hitting the wall even if we brake, and the damage ruining your day. We're not past the point that braking will save lives or even make the car unrepairable.

  • source
  • parent