• TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, it’s reasonable to say they could have done something and failed to do so. However, when you start to dig into what they could have done, it’s hard to think of anything particularly effective and easy to see why they could have been convinced into inaction. So you could say they made a mistake, but were not fully at fault. The ones at fault are the ones who have been convincing them.

    I like to say that responsibility isn’t neatly divided up into percentages. Someone can be fully 100% responsible for something that happened, but other people can have some minor responsibility also. There’s no threshold between being responsible or not, either, it’s a sliding scale. When assigning responsibility and blame it’s important to remember these things.

    • HardlightCereal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s hard to think of anything particularly effective

      A communist revolution. And don’t give me that “they didn’t know” crap, there were communists fighting the good fight back then.

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey man, I love communism as much as any far left lemmy user, but can you explain how a communist revolution would have impacted climate change?

        • HardlightCereal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The primary motive to pollute was the profit motive of fossil fuel companies, and automotive manufacturers. Today, the biggest argument against closing mines is jobs, and the biggest argument for cars is getting to work. A communist system has universal basic income. Better planned neighbourhoods such as the Soviet 15 minute cities would also reduce transport emissions, though the soviets were not communist. There should exist no such thing as mining or energy companies, and under communism, that’s the case.

          • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hmm. Under communism, even with UBI, people would still have jobs, or hobbies, or would go on road trips or vacations, so you’d still have people driving cars.

            I agree that better, more walkable city planning and functional public transit is important for reversing climate change, but lots of people think that, not just communists. I don’t see what a communist revolution has to do with that - even your example is of Soviet cities, not communist cities.

            And even if there are not energy companies under communism, there still need to be power plants, electricity would still need to be generated. What about communism would make those power plants be powered by renewables instead of coal?