Skip Navigation

You're viewing a single thread.

33 comments

  • Yes, it is 100% that the actions of wealthy people represent the lion's share of the climate impact of the human race.

    No, it's not because they fly jets around all the time. While that certainly doesn't help, switching to all-electric transportation and green sources of electrical energy would, just on its own, represent roughly a FIFTY PER CENT reduction in CO2 emissions. This is a good overview. That's a big task to just throw around as a hypothetical, of course, but there are proportional benefits to be had by making proportional levels of effort on partial measures. That and other big savings could be accomplished if the world as a whole prioritized it, but "the world"'s decisions are made by people who prioritize yachts and blowjobs from Estonian teenagers far above switching to greener energy sources, which is why we're all going to be fucked about a generation from now.

    All billionaires switching out their private jets for greyhound buses overnight would do fuck-all for climate change. Flying on a private jet emits somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 times as much per person as flying on a commercial airliner. I.e. if there are more than 5 regular people for each billionaire, then they're not what's killing the planet. Aviation in general emits a ton of CO2, yes. Changing regulations would do more to fix the problem than curbing private jets, and certainly more than posting memes about private jets.

    And, of course, it's suspicious that this concern about private jets in the media and memes came about all of a sudden, and all in reference to one particular type of billionaire-induced emissions and in fact one particular billionaire, right after she started expressing one particular type of political view. If there's one thing the propaganda industry likes to do, it's to take a genuine problem (emissions) and identify it as something caused by one person who's solidly on the "other side" in very public, consistently-messaged, and meme-able fashion. It kills two birds with one stone: It shifts blame to that person to tarnish their reputation and impugn and distract from the good things they're trying to say, and it shifts blame away from the people actually causing the problem.

    I thought to myself, am I being unfair? Have I entered into some sort of bizarre the-shills-are-everywhere paranoia, such that even a story about the IRS that happens to highlight one particular aspect of their increased tax scrutiny with nothing whatsoever to do with climate change or Taylor Swift, sends me into a frenzy of propagandaspotting?

    Yeah, maybe that's a fair point. I should look over the article and see if maybe it's just a story about the IRS and nothing about the suddenly-all-media-likes-to-talk about talking point which is all of a sudden a big deal, and just delete my whole painstakingly-typed comment.

    I looked at the article. "Taylor" is the sixth word and "Swift" is the seventh.

    • On the other hand, the article mentions climate or emissions exactly zero times. You put that there.

    • Here's what makes me roll my eyes...

      Most of the people making these comments won't make a bit of effort in their own lives to make a difference for the planet and humans overall. Sure, recycling is still pretty messed up, but we can't even get people to put trash in a bin. They certainly aren't willing to consume less or put effort into creating less waste in the first place. And I'm willing to bet money that if they suddenly had a private plane and that kind of money they would be doing exactly the same thing.

      It's a 'fuck you I got mine' world, and most people are happily stepping on their neighbors hoping to get above the mass. I don't know how to fix people, but if we can stop supporting the systems that are pushing us down that'd be a huge step in the right direction.

    • This most recent round of "Taylor Swift private jet bad" memery has opened my eyes to how actually uninterested you people are in getting out of the shitty culture war they put us in and focus instead on combating the upper classes. You'll talk shit about "fuck all billionaires" all day long until the second one of those billionaires goes online and says something you agree with. Taylor Swift, no matter what her actual beliefs are, does more harm every day than any single Trump-loving, trailer-living, QAnon-believing Alabama redneck ever does. In capitalism, the hoarding of wealth is inherently an act of violence, and Taylor Swift is just as guilty as any other billionaires in that regard.

      • There is a roiling mass of hatred simmering in the people of the United States. They've been fucked, and on some level, they know it. They sit on top of the greatest pile of wealth the world has ever seen, and for the most part they go to work, reliably, every day, and help to create it. They do their part. And what comes back to them is pennies, health problems, humiliation, exhaustion, and somewhere, off in the distance, where they can just barely hear it, the mocking laughter of the people who are keeping all the money they're creating.

        They know the game is rigged. Their systems of education and media have been deliberately sabotaged to disguise the fact, but there's no way to hide it. It's their life. In their hearts, they know what's happening, and they know they have to still get up and help make it happen, or else: Homelessness, jail, divorce, poverty, humiliation. The men with the tasers are in the wings, all too eager to step in to adjust anyone who steps out of line. And so, they participate, but anger at the system cannot fully be prevented.

        And so: The billionaire classes constructed channels, conduits, barriers and feeder-lines, to channel and direct that rage at simple targets that would be convenient for them. It's not that the medical industry has been hollowed out and replaced with a dysfunctional shell that doesn't care if you die, or suffer. It's Dr. Fauci.

        Or gayness in the movies. Or Nancy Pelosi. Or whoever the fuck the target is. Someone who's comfortably far enough removed from the problem that all that rage can find a safe target, where it won't lead to any change. All that righteous anger, a millimeter from the surface, primed for the taking for any activist organization to grab and channel with their own effective messaging. There are people dying for someone to tell them who stole their jobs, their pensions, their kids' education, the future. The only problem is that Fox News is telling them that it wasn't Wal-Mart and Warren Buffet and Monsanto and Sinclair.

        IT WAS FUCKING TAYLOR SWIFT AGRBARARLRRBLBLBB

        There are two problems with this, as I mentioned. One, they'll get mad at Taylor Swift, or maybe break in Pelosi's house and fracture her husband's skull with a hammer. Two, they'll remain blissfully fine with Monsanto or Bayer.

        And here you are, buying in to the exact same propaganda they did, and cloaking in in some leftist pro-public camouflage. I don't give a shit about Taylor Swift, positive or negative. Are you right that she probably should be paying 90% tax like would be a good idea for everyone in her tax bracket? Yeah, probably. That's a good solution, I'm fine with it. Is she polluting the waterways or funding Honduran coups or deliberately engineering the destruction of the planet? No. Are you misguided for thinking that it helps simply getting angry at her, when that very anger at that very particular type of target is probably the most potent weapon the wealthy have had in their arsenal to defeat real social change since the 1980s? Yeah, probably.

        • All that to say "I will defend billionaires as long as they say things I like on neo-nazi microblogging sites"

          • Don't think I was defending anybody. I'm saying how I think these propaganda networks work and one essential element of them.

            What consequences do you think should happen to Taylor Swift? If I know that, maybe that'll give me an opportunity to defend her against them.

33 comments