OK here's some great news to end 2020!

It turns out that 68% of humans, if given the choice, would choose to only extract from nature what can be regenerated, leaving plenty for future generations. So we're not all greedy bastards.
The problem, of course, is that 32% of us would choose to extract everything immediately and convert it to profit for themselves. They end up extremely rich and can easily capture the media, the financial system, and our politics.

Sound familiar?
This guarantees ecological crisis and overshoot after a few generations.

These results are from a 2014 study by researchers at Harvard and Yale:
nature.com/articles/natur…
If we had an actually functioning democracy (one that wasn't captured by the rich, greedy people) the 68% would easily hold the 32% in check and we could transition to a system that worked for everybody, and the planet. We 68% should all have as a goal ending money in politics.
This is a page from @jasonhickel’s excellent book “Less Is More”
Yes the path is hard (how do we prevent democratic corruption) but the good news is there's a path. The path is also indicated by all the indigenous peoples who chose not to organize around the insane goal of "profit above all else"

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Peter Kalmus

Peter Kalmus Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ClimateHuman

30 Dec 20
Our current system prioritizes corporate profits and the accumulation of vast wealth and power in the hands of a few, whereas I imagine a system that prioritizes people and the planet and which is far more equitable. My imperfect label for the former system is "capitalism."
I think the next big thing in the climate movement will be mainstreaming the idea that we can't come out of climate and ecological breakdown without shifting the goal away from profit & accumulation and toward people & planet. That is, to end "capitalism"
The Green New Deal is an important stepping stone but I think we need to go further - we need to actually change the goal of the entire system. The goal can no longer be profit & massive accumulation & desperate consumption, it needs to be happy humans on a healthy planet.
Read 8 tweets
22 Dec 20
Here are a few of the most impactful climate books I've read. First up: "Less is More" by @jasonhickel. Yes, we CAN organize society around human thriving instead of further enriching billionaires. Yes, we DO need to deal w growthism to stop climate and ecological breakdown.
Next, "Braiding Sweetgrass" by Robin Wall Kimmerer. Such a tour de force melding of science, indigenous wisdom, and poetry. I dare you to read it without crying. Especially the elders as last living remnants of their mother tongues, and how language is so much more than language.
"Merchants of Doubt" by @NaomiOreskes and @ErikMConway (who happens to be a colleague of mine at the space lab). The classic exposé of the evil scholars who create confusion and delay in support of deadly corporate malfeasance with their lies. Yes, evil.
Read 7 tweets
7 Dec 20
Why is hunger skyrocketing, when almost half of food produced is thrown into landfills and the stock market is soaring?
Why is it so hard to get healthcare for all, even during a pandemic, even when the policy is so popular? Why is healthcare still tied to employment? Certainly, industry profits and money in politics. But it's even deeper.
Those who control the capital seek to create scarcity - or rather, the illusion of scarcity, by artificially preventing access - so as to force the workers into what amounts to wage slavery and drive exponential growth, which is also destroying the Earth's living systems.
Read 7 tweets
10 Oct 20
We need a billion climate activists. No one can tell you how to be a climate activist; that's up to you to figure out. But here are a few suggestions.
First, find a local group of activists to join - or better yet, two or three. You need to find your people: people who share a similar set of goals as you, people you like and who are working toward something you believe in.
These activists will become your friends and co-conspirators. Logistically and emotionally, climate activism is too hard to do alone. You need support, and your voice will be more powerful when joined with your group.
Read 11 tweets
7 Sep 20
Two basic concepts in climate I want the public to know:

1 Trend. If something gets worse every day, after some time it becomes unbearable and systems break.

2 Irreversibility. Humans can't "clean up" climate breakdown or ecosystem and biodiversity loss.
That we're on an escalator should be very obvious, but I still see articles on "navigating change" and the phrase "new normal" pop up enough that I'm not sure it is. Even prominent scientists until recently used the phrase "new normal," probably because it makes a good soundbite.
Until we stop the drivers of the escalator, it will keep taking us up into hotter and hotter temperatures, which are driving all the awful impacts we're seeing. The main driver is simple: extracting and burning fossil fuel. Animal agriculture is a major contributor (~15%) as well
Read 6 tweets
3 Sep 20
Today's LA Times has two articles about the extreme heat this weekend, and neither so much as mentions climate change. But both came with beach photos (one in today's print edition only) similar to this.

latimes.com/california/sto…

latimes.com/california/sto…
We're very late in the climate emergency. Every article about a climate-related impact should:
1. mention climate change
2. address how climate influences this impact
3. address future projections of this impact

To not do so seems journalistically dishonest to me.
Maybe the authors @LukeMMoney and @CartoonKahuna could weigh in.

Why did you choose not to mention climate, let alone address how climate influences heat waves and how they will worsen in coming years and decades? Did you think it was irrelevant? Is it editorial policy?
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!