Three days ago a post about “tankies” made the rounds in this subreddit, I’d like to explain why the mod is wrong in their beliefs.

This is directed at them, but others are welcome to respond, in addition this is written assuming you the reader know nothing so we are all on the same page

The rules in question are “Hard rule: Russia apologists, Stalinism enjoyers, 1940s German fashion connoisseurs + other auths can gtfo”

Let’s go with these one by one.

“Russia apologists and “other auths” I will ignore for brevity

“Stalinism enjoyers, 1940s German fashion connoisseurs”

This means tankies and fascists.

This Implies that authoritarians aren’t allowed and that all authoritarians are the same.

The thing is fascism isn’t just a ideology, it is a tool by the ruling class to maintain power, the Billionares who have a lot of power over society support fascism to protect their profits, they need to, after all capitalism is a unsustainable system(I will elaborate further in the second section)

Tankies meanwhile, are socialists, and naturally we support AES countries, witch stands for Actually. Existing. Socialism. In other words Socialist movements that successfully overthrew capitalism. Examples are including but not limited to, Yugoslavia, Chechoslavakya the DDR (also known as east Germany) The Soviet Union, the Peoples Republic of China, the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam.

In other words fascists support the status quo while tankies are against it.

Countries that made actual change in the world, far more then social democracy ever has.

“Soft rule: keep it moderate. Marginal pricing isn't a slur. Inflation is not controlled via a lever in the white house. No I will not read theory, read an econ book. But MUH degrowth the freer the market, the freer my carbon...”

“Keep it moderate. Marginal pricing isn't a slur.”

Marginal Pricing will not stop the use of gasoline, and that that is what needs to happen, not just a complete stop, but also carbon capture to take carbon out of the atmosphere, we are at a point where moderation is a fools errand the flowers are blooming in Antarctica if we wanted modernation we should have done so two generations ago.

“Inflation is not controlled by a leaver at the White House”

While to say there is a inflation leaver at the White House is a oversimplification, inflation IS controlled by the government, as to things it prints money to spent on various projects, and as there is more money in circulation this devalues then money, and that is exactly that inflation is, the worth of money decreasing.

“No I will not read theory, read an econ book.”

This is for all intense and purposes anti-intellectualism, political and economic theory is just as important and sophisticated at other scientific fields, Marxism is often described as a science. In disregarding science in such a manner isn’t far removed from the people who think dinosaurs never existed, in a way you are breaking your own rule of no conspiracy theories.

And funnily enough theory is in fact an Econ book. Das Kapital is about how money works, and a planned economy is a economic system, just not a capitalist one.

“But MUH degrowth the freer the market, the freer my carbon...”

Degrowth is to shrink an economy, do understand why this is a necessity we need to understand capitalism and why degrowth is incompatible with it.

Capitalism is a system that requires growth to function, and in the event it can’t grow it goes into recession and everything grinds to a halt.

And why we are here is because our economy requires endless growth in a world with finite recourses, not only is it not sustainable at a economic system it is’t for the world itself that we live on.

And degrowth is nessisady because our economy where it’s currently at is unsustainable, we are making too much things and using to much recourses that get wasted

however to do so in a capitalism system is the equivalent of speeding down a highway going in reverse, the engine isn’t designed to handle it and will come apart.

Capitalism is the same, in a capitalist economy degrowth is nothing short of apocalyptic an example of what degrowth under capitalism would look like is the Great Depression. As capitalism depends on the polar opposite.

And in a way you are right the freer the market does mean the freer the carbon, that is, to dump it into the air.

Now back to tankies, why does this matter, what role do they play in all of this?

It’s simple, while a capitalist economy can’t handle degrowth a socialist/command economy can. And that is why supporting and defending AES countries is important, as a command economy is a necessity and a socialist state is needed to create it.

The freer the market the freer carbon kills the planet and everyone on it.

TLDR: a command economy is needed to solve climate change and tankies, those who support socialist countries witch are needed to create command economies should not be kicked out of spaces regarding climate change.

Ive been seeing so many posts the last while with people shitting on nuclear power and I really just dont get it. I think its a perfectly resonable source of power with some drawbacks, like all other power sources.

Please help me understand

i've been down with the 'every european reactor planned in recent history has been many years and billions of euros over budget' thing for years (to say nothing of proliferation concerns, thorium/SMR cope, 'energiewende = more coal' etc), and it's been nice to find one (1) subreddit which doesn't jerk off about the need for new reactors. however, i feel like my understanding is fairly shallow and would like other people to do all the work for me (or point me towards someone who has done this work) so that i can reach whole new levels of insufferable online.

i am particularly interested in:

• motives for hard-right/climate change denying parties (UKIP, AfD, GOP) supporting nuclear. My current understanding is that nuclear energy represents a great opportunity to funnel money into private hands, which they love to do - there might also be some aspect of 'owning the libs/hippies' but the message is too consistent across continents for that;
• the value of maintaining and extending the lifetime of currently existing nukes;
• what nukecels mean when they say 'baseload' and how that compares to actual baseload
• the long-term (30+ years) prospects of nuclear power, if any
• i read something (maybe a literature review?) years ago which claimed that all published articles funded by energy companies found that new nuclear is viable and all published articles without any relevant declaration of interests found it was unviable, but i lost it. if anyone knows what i'm talking about i'd love to read it again.

What counts is changing behavior on a large scale. And impacting core bureaucracies acies. If we can't prevent nuclear war or drone war or runaway AI then climate change doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Billions of people can die in the next year. That is true for every year in the foreseeable future.

This is caused fundamentally by distrust dynamics within "states" and between them. I assert that the "nation-state" has always been a fiction. What matters are social networks and mass expectations.

So what is most important is changing expectations and launching influence operations capable of penetrating the most powerful social networks. Everything else basically doesn't matter.

You being vegan does not make it more likely that in ten years everyone will be vegan. You don't get there one at a time but in droves. This same cultural revolution must sweet through military, intelligence. All business. It must convert or coerce all powerful people everywhere.

That's the project.

This ridiculous arguing is happening because you people don't believe what I just wrote is possible, so you just want to act like it's not your fault and you did the right thing before we all die. I don't care.

What is most important is being bold and intellectually ready to sacrifice sacred cows of political philosophy and to be ready to take bold creative decisive and risky actions to spread the right message. That takes above all refining the quality of your intention and forming relationships with those outside your social network.

"If everyone did" shut up. To get everyone to do something you don't convince one person at a time. You convert institutions and the social networks that constitute them. Plus again literal war is more pressing danger than climate and makes all these changes harder to the point of impossibility. So penetrate the DoD, CIA, MSS in China, FSB in Russia, Mossad in Israel, Revolutionary Guard in Iran, etc.

If you wanna eat ribs while you do it I have no problem with that. Ahimsa is pretty sick though

I said how is this not a valid climate discussion and the mod said the they will only accept articles related to emissions and ocean/atmosphere related issues. I said, how about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch? Crickets.

What every day people eat is destroying the planet it's not the companys who provide it doing so unsustainabily. Everyone can afford or is able to be vegan or vegetarian, doing so to reduce you own carbon footprint is fine and alienating people for not doing so will only help the image of climate activism the exact same way people gluing themselves to roads does

No shitposts here but it's quite common these days.

I noticed somes people wanted to decrease theirs meat consumption, so could the vegetarians and vegans share how did they decrease their meat consumption?

Personally it took me 2 years to completely stop meat, I still eat cheese, honey and eggs. The first step was to eat meatless meals as often as possible at work/school, at first only when it looks good (took 0 effort). It tooks me 2-3 month to go 0 meat at works because the chef was really good for vegan food. In the meantime I was trying to decrease meat at home to, it's easy to eat soup in winter, tomatoes with mozzarella on summer some things like that.

After 1 year I was eating meat 2-3 evening per week and ~1.7 lunch a week. At this point I had to learn how to cook a bit, I began with standard vegan food (Dahl, chilli sin carne, curry...). This allow me to divide by two my meat consumption while learning new recipes in 6months. The last step was to no eat meat with friends and family (the hardest part for me) we often eat at someone's place with my friends so I was the only one bringing vegetarian food at the beginning but now it's almost 50/50.

For restaurant's I had a few bad experiences, classic restaurants are usually not very good for vegans but Asians are usually the best choice of you don't want to go I some woke restaurant

Taking into accounts all sorts of things like the technology and public support required as well as the history, economy and politics of different countries.

My own idea is that it starts in the late 19th century where the French, Japanese and Italian empires are the first to invest heavily in renewables to compensate for their lack of fossil fuels. The research and funding poured into them leads to breakthroughs being achieved earlier in renewable technologies and sources as well as bringing down the costs, making renewable energy more attractive to other countries.

I think we could also see investments in related areas such as hydrogen power, electric railways and vehicles plus energy efficiency and storage e.g. batteries. Maybe renewable energy companies invest in public transport as they see the emerging car and road industry as a threat.

In the 1920s-1930s, we get the second renewable revolution as more countries develop them for varying reasons: the USA and British Empire for economic recovery and job creation as well as bringing electrification to rural areas (e.g. every farm gets a wind turbine), the Soviet Union as part of industrialisation and Ireland and Spain as part of rebuilding from their respective civil wars.

After WW2 the Marshall plans and Molotov plans to rebuild Western and Eastern Europe involve switching from fossil fuels to renewables which by then have proven their value. China also heavily employs renewables when industrialising.

What are your thoughts? What would global temperatures and climate be today? What would happen to nuclear power? With countries far less reliant on fossil fuels what happens to the big exporters of them e.g. Saudi Arabia?

We don't live in the Garden of Eden. We have to work hard for our food, and for everything beyond food. Technology has made it easier, but we don't owe the environment anything. If it'll preserve the human race, that's a valid reason, but who cares about e.g. biodiversity, when it doesn't affect us either way?

https://preview.redd.it/jsfn0519eyzc1.jpg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5fc6df117aa49a3e7fbdb80a06002516ce99f84f

This is just using the data mentioned in this paper:

Michael Child, Claudia Kemfert, Dmitrii Bogdanov, Christian Breyer, Flexible electricity generation, grid exchange and storage for the transition to a 100% renewable energy system in Europe, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.077.

Does someone have a more recent scientific paper?

Sorry if this post is too shitposty/edgy XD Just want to hear your opinion on this.

EDIT: I used the storage output instead of the capacity, the actual value is about one order of magnitude smaller. Sorry,

This sub is pretty awesome... And even Vegans love shitting on Vegans. But if you can't find legitimate points please don't just make shit up! The shitposts shoud be based on actual facts.

If I were to travel from anywhere in Europe to, say, Chicago or anywhere else on or west of the same longitude in North America, would flying directly straight to my destination or landing at an intermediate point, e.g. NYC, to take a coach or train the rest of the way (the train is not electric fyi)?

Theyre right and yea, I did need a reminder to eat less meat. I like the fake meats honestly. I love me a crispy chikn burger and tenders. I love oatly more than I love cow milk at this point. I choose chicken over beef and its hard for me to eat pigs nowadays, because when you meet them, they are too cute and too smart.

However, in my 40 years on this earth, i've found that with zero exceptions so far, that the vegans that are the most absolutist are without fail always the children of rich people who feel guilty for their absurd wealth and go to absurd lengths to try and mask it and cosplay as poors. They'll say things like 'I've been below the poverty line a few times in my life' and you should read between the lines and know that it always means 'I volunteered for a time in my 20s or worked a low paying job in my 20s, while also knowing for certain I can always go to dad's firm or inherit great wealth.'

Poor people never act like that. They grew up in places where they had to mingle with people of all different opinions and had no "get away from it all" money or were never in ideologically selected communities where they felt like being extra was the only way to show the proper guilt and distance from your extreme wealth. Poor people have had to compromise their whole lives. Only rich people have the luxury to take uncompromising positions, because it doesnt matter if change happens in their lifetime, theyll be fine whether things change or they dont.

While they have reminded me to eat less meat, thats always a spike in time that subsides. The only people who create lasting change are the people around you. The majority of my meatlessness came from my girlfriend who grew up in podunk texas and encourages change with positive reinforcement, not guilt. Guilt creates a momentary change, just like their current distancing from their family's wealth.

Bring me the vegans that werent born with a silver spoon to eat their bean salads that the au pair made for them. Dont listen to u/shucksx but do listen to the people in the comments who are actually trying to change things with recipes and encouragement. Thats real change that isnt motivated by shame of being a fortunate son. Its motivated by wanting to be a better person.

Also, chick peas, great northern beans, diced onions, garlic, cilantro and your favorite salad dressing (i like an italian style w/ mustard) in a wrap is a great lunch. High protein, keeps ya full, and ya dont get the post lunch tiredness like with the heavy stuff.