- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
“The global north must take responsibility for reducing its own consumption and building domestic renewable capacity, instead of externalising socio-environmental costs to the global south. We must continue to fight to decolonise and transform the global financial architecture.”
Just to be clear, of course I believe green energy should be implemented more. Still, I believe there is room for criticism and this is what this report does (btw I’m definitely not a fan of Greenpeace). Actually, I believe this sort of criticism is necessary because we live under capitalism.
A kinda similar example I could give from Europe would be in relation to some protected areas called Natura 2000. Briefly, in some of these places wind turbines are installed by the thousands and the locals are protesting against that and they say stuff like “No to wind turbines”. I would not expect, nor need from these people to talk about the benefits of wind turbines.
I agree that capitalism needs to be criticized and neo-colonialism as well, but not under the guise of ecology. You can transition out of fossils while remaining in capitalism, you can get out of capitalism without getting out of fossils. These problems are important but perpendicular.
Why not? In the countryside I used to live in, I had the same person ask me to sign a petition against nuclear power plants and 3 weeks later against a solar farm project that would cut down trees. That militant activist was not aware of the amount of fossils that was going into the local electricity mix. She was genuinely surprised when I showed her that she is actively lobbying against a transition out of fossil fuels.
Locals are not dumber than centralized powers but they are not smarter either.