We're living in a post-apocalypse dystopia, the ruins of what they could be. The entire planet is being crushed under the weight of shredded plastic, cash checking stores, and prepaid debit cards yet nobody does anything. We are slowly inching towards a massive environmental crisis yet all people seem to want are cheaper solar panels. "Community" no longer exists; towns are for redevelopment into subdivisions and cities are for redevelopment into managed office parks. NASA can't even get to the moon anymore yet Trump can somehow find enough money for a space force, new missiles and new bombs.
I get this queasy feeling that 10 years from now everything is going to be a lot worse; climate change will cause more severe droughts prompting a much greater global migrant crisis while new atomic bomb testing adds radioactive fallout to the list of shit we're pumping into the air. Countries will either melt down or vainly try to lock themselves behind walls and guards like Israel and Apartheid SA do. This will suddenly prompt violence from the underclasses, which the center won't be able to handle. Even now when they are given a godsend like Trump, the center can't handle any criticism of their cosmopolitan capitalist lifestyle. They'll keep circling the drain until they have to move from a police response to a military response like Mexico did in the 2000s, prompting a global civil war that will have no winners.
Maybe not 10 years, but certainly 20-30, if something drastic isn't done about global warming, the migrations, wars, famines, and genocides will probably exceed the sheer misery "hot" WWIII would've caused if the old Cold War boiled over. Except all the extant military powers are going to be on the same "side", ruthlessly trampling over and reshuffling the populace worldwide.
I think you're just coming down from your propaganda high comrade. Shit was never that great and it was never headed for anything that great. But they wanted you to think that so you'd buy more shit. Sorry to break it to you.
What's with the faggy NASA t-shirt with this meme?
She's sometimes depicted with it, sometimes she isn't. I think it has to do with whatever artist happens to draw her (most of them women).
wew lad and I thought this was some kind of communist board
lol theres a thread up right now about going innawoods but none of you niggas are down for it lol
Which thread? I'm down I just want to get some cash first so I can buy some good shit to take innawoods with me. Also buy some land so I have some legal rights over my woods while the state still exists.
This. Changes to lifestyle on the individual level could make a difference, but that pales in comparison to massive changes in underlying infrastructure that could make civilization sustainable with little or no change to current lifestyle.
Specifically on NASA: At best it would be a waste of money but in reality it's just a good propaganda and weapons system development tool. And you and your kind are MIC-tools.
Go fellate the business end of a shotgun Trekkie fag. I heard you can hitch a ride on Hally's comet that way, but only if you hurry.
So I still hold some faith in the limitless potential of the human spirit, and I refuse to be browbeaten by cynical, shortsighted abuses of scientific inquiry into the endlessly fascinating mysteries of the universe. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? Whatever. The same was true of the USSR's program, and as the Cold War wound down, both sides' space programs were among the most emphatic supporters deep inside the establishment apparatus or otherwise about the importance of peaceful cooperation and collaboration for all mankind, against the saber-rattling influences of their respective militaries, and remain so to this day. You can probably guess what I'm about to say, about the enormous technological fallout of space exploration far more than compensating for any expense incurred in it. I can only imagine you're well aware of how far back we'd be without it, and have chosen to ignore it.
Even ignoring that, there's the fact that in a hundred years, a thousand years, a million years, our first steps out of the terrestrial cradle will remain the one event in contemporary human civilization seen as more than a trivial footnote of history.
yes. I'm really scared of this. but, you know, we can't do anything with this. however, more an more, I prepare research papers on ecology and climate change for anonymous-essay.com/college-essay.html ,I realize the importance of recycling, conscious consumption and waste sorting, we can really save our planet
Seriously climate change won't be the end of the world. Temperatures will go up, species will go extinct, freak weather conditions will become more common, true. But huge tracts of northern land will become cultivatable. It won't be the end of the world. In the mesozoic era there was a period of hundreds of millions of years where there were never any icecaps at all, and life on earth survived that … Seeing as fashionable liberalism (e.g. green parties, labour parties) at the moment has strong support for climate action, we probably will manage to get sort things out within 20 years. If only people would reject the mass hysteria surrounding nuclear and start using that. Much more efficient, pwoerful, and clean energy source
The Mesozoic also had life that had spent millions of years adapting to that hot, arid world. We don't.
The problem isn't that global warming will cause a mass extinction event for humanity barring a catastrophic runaway scenario like the "clathrate gun", but that the enormous reshuffling of populations in even the best-case scenarios will result in gobsmackingly violent wars, omnipresent human rights violations, and possibly the global collapse of democracy. More expensive than wind/solar/geo/tidal, gigantic security risk, if done at necessary scale to replace fossil fuel would be impossible to regulate sufficiently.
Wind solar tidal etc require whole new infrastrucutre like batteries. Nuclear stations can simply be plugged into where the coal stations used to be we geddit you watched chernobyl wtf does this mean. 70% percent of France's energy comes from nuclear power. It can be done
Sustainable power, even including batteries, already has a lower LCoE (levelized cost of energy) than nuclear. Also, the electrification of energy consuming devices that currently require fossil fuels will necessarily involve the addition of "free" off-peak grid storage (i.e.: electric vehicles, ground source heat pump HVAC, etc.). Pic & 1st PDF related. Chernobyl was a conventional reactor, which due to peak nuclear, would not be capable of replacing fossil fuels at positive ERoEI (energy returned on energy invested). The only sustainable form of nuclear energy is breeders that transmute their fuel (yes, this includes muh thorium, which at ERoEI similar to uranium has deposits amounting to a fraction of uranium reserves) into weapons-grade plutonium. Aside from the enormous weapons proliferation risk, which is why breeders are have been banned under international treaty since the 1970s, there are other problems with breeders, such as the fact that breeders remain completely experimental and unproven in the electrical generation market (as opposed to the weapon manufacturing market), they have a lengthy history of terrible reliability and constant failures compared to conventional reactors, and that (unlike conventional reactors) one of their possible failure modes (even accidentally, let alone through sabotage!) is to literally reconfigure themselves into an atomic bomb and detonate in a mushroom cloud, 2nd PDF related. Electricity accounts for less than 1/6th of French energy consumption
Hyper-individualism is the end result of egalitarian thought. It's all about how much luxury items you can stuff up your but. Capitalists and most brand of Marxists are no different when it comes to that sentiment.
Communities were traditionally formed around great leader figures and various sacred symbols, places, items, etc. Leftists literally worked to undermine these things by attacking authoritarianism and spiritualism.