My god, even the best chance for socialism is hopeless because of the dollar. “it’s not doomer because the party could do something different” idgaf day after day it’s more dollars and less long term hope. Nothing China does can matter because all the green energy, all the bnr, all the poverty elimination, all of it is paid for with imperial currency and little to no interest in changing this arrangement from within. The party will talk about win-win arrangements and mutually-beneficial cooperation until the fucking nukes are flying.

  • bbnh69420 [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    How does the west fall without nuclear holocaust? Or would it be a partial nuclear holocaust rather than a full one?

    How does China building solar panels solve climate change? No matter how many renewables they invest in, it’s a group project with a group grade

    • finderscult
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      For the first point; by simple collapse. We know from the ussr that nuclear powers can collapse without it ending the world (even if some of us think it maybe should’ve and we’d be better off). The government fails to stop a revolution, some rich guys get a little too self assured and back some legal separation, some banks simply collapse without anyone bailing them out, there’s a hundred scenarios, and most of them would happen if any single one happens… But the easiest thing would simply be if the global south stopped being exploited and instead was openly armed with just 13 nuclear icbms each.

      To your second point, if you shrink fossil fuels customers, you reduce emissions fucking up the cycle. Moving all but the West away from fossil fuels, essentially making some countries leapfrog the technology tree, shrinks overall demand while reducing emissions enough that we might keep under 2c. We reduce demand, the producers can’t export while maintaining their economies, meaning the West must produce and consume, and use government resources to prop up both sides of that industry. The economics behind such a move from the West don’t favor longevity, and if the West becomes more poor, then renewables look even better as a survival tactic.

      • bbnh69420 [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I gotta be honest, the example of the ussr does not make me more secure that the US would go equally as quietly into that dark night. And the only country making progress is China, not the rest of the global south and especially not India.