A Conservative Policy Solution to Slow Down Climate Change?

[Hristo Botev]

(ETA, @JP:)

It's a question of kind and degrees I think. The marriage laws are set by the states, not the federal government. So, we can vote with our feet, theoretically. And presumably these laws differ by state to address state-specific problems, conditions. That said, yes, the (state) government is playing mom/dad to us when they say, listen redneck, you actually can't marry your 14-year-old cousin (sorry Jerry Lee). And most of us are probably OK with that (even us rednecks ); but that's why it's a question of degrees. Once you start saying: CC is an existential threat to our nation and even our planet, and we can show through modeling that if we raised the minimum marriage age to 21 at the national (and even global) level, we'd have X amount of a positive impact on the environment; then we get into dystopia territory. The more you take autonomy and decision making out of individual, family, local, and state hands, the more nervous I get, by degrees.

[Hristo Botev]

This is in part what happens when a traditional culture clashes with a modern one, no? And doesn't it mean something that the American born peers are slackers? When those recently immigrated Muslim girls you're describing eventually have their own kids, won't they more than likely end up being slackers as well? I'm not advocating (for a single second) arranged marriages, etc. But, that culture/tradition those girls come from has existed and thrived longer than our own American/Western modern consumerist culture; and perhaps we shouldn't dismiss everything about that culture as backwards. (Or, assume that recently immigrated Muslim girls aren't just as quick as American-born teenagers to think their parents/extended family/culture is stupid and stifling.)

[7Wannabe5]

@Hristo Botev:

I was partner to an Islamic marriage myself. I agree that there are good things about more traditional cultures. I also agree that freedom rocks. My point was that tradition can be as confining, if not more so, than federal regulations. My Iranian-American stepdaughter when given a 10 PM curfew at age 18 simply snuck out of her bedroom window, just like I did at age 14

[Hristo Botev]

@7w5: That's a good point (about tradition being confining). The same is true for consumerist culture. My point is that if I have to pick which of those three--tradition, federal regs, consumerist culture--is most likely to have constraints geared towards promoting the life and dignity of the individual human person (as opposed to merely treating individuals as means to someone or something else's ends), I'll pick tradition every time.

[Campitor]

The age of marital consent is a state issue and each has defined their own policy toward individual consent. 18 is the age of individual consent in all states. And depending on the circumstances, most states allow marriage as early as 16 but only with parental consent.

The age of individual or parental consent in the states adhere to cultural norms. Each state recognizes that individuals can give an informed consent at 18. And the legal limits for under 18 requiring parent participation recognizes that a young person may not have the maturity to make an informed decision; adult guidance is needed.

I'm for giving women more agency. Society is best served when women can be maximally self-actualized. I don't see how government setting legal boundaries, to what an adult woman can do with her life and body, gives them more agency or allows for maximal self-actualization.

Perhaps their are some women that are pressured into marriage against their own will - I'm 100% against that. Perhaps a mechanism is needed where a woman's consent requires some kind of formality similar to what is required when creating a will - I hereby confirm that I'm of sound mind, etc., etc., etc.

Women having babies later, especially at a rate that increases the population, will not help in carbon reduction. Everyday their are women hitting their 30s and having babies. The average age of marriage in the US ranges from 25 to 30. The CDC reports that the average age of women birthing is around 27 years of age (Hispanic women average 26 yrs, etc.).

I do think there are individual actions that in aggregate can reduce carbon emissions but it must be induced organically and not coercively otherwise the majority of the population will be under arrest or fined. Those in charge who enacted these draconian measures would soon be voted out of office unless they were granted despotic power as the means of safeguarding the environment.

[7Wannabe5]

@Hristo:

I don’t entirely disagree with you. I would even concede that a 4th quadrant represented by Bohemian anarchist co-op has it’s own flavor of constraints. What I might suggest as somebody who has been up and down the dial is that the best possible option is to attempt to integrate or tolerate the tension inherent in the deficits and benefits of all these aspects of modern human reality or solution sets.

[Hristo Botev]

What I might suggest as somebody who has been up and down the dial is that the best possible option is to attempt to integrate or tolerate the tension inherent in the deficits and benefits of all these aspects of modern human reality or solution sets.

I don't think we have a choice but to do exactly that--it's as futile to try and stop change as it is to try and force it on those who don't want it.

[jacob]

I'll just note that all this just confirms my "position" as a fatalist (not to be confused with defeatist) in these matters: That the human "social technologies" of nationalism (nation/state), democracy, and market trading and the ideologies they've inspired are just not sophisticated or far-sighted enough for the task of solving the complex global predicament they've unintentionally created under the influence of STEM. Indeed, the reason we're in this predicament is due to almost two generations' experience in failing to solve it. Most of humanity is chained so hard into Plato's Cave that it's impossible to live, act, or think in any other way than the shadow wall we're currently staring at before the cave literally starts flooding, burning, and running out of food or healthy air.

This means that current ideologies will not act until that time where the damage function exceeds the benefits of propagating the current beliefs and modes of behavior. The conditions that future generations will have to live under will subsequently be somewhat worse than they are at that time-point because of the (30-50 year) lag-time in the geophysical system.

For what it's worth I'm supremely pleased that this thread has stayed mostly free of disinformation allowing for actual policy discussion instead of denying the parts of reality that require admitting and accepting hard-nosed solutions. It would have been nice if that level of maturity had been reached or rather not lost in the world at large 30 years ago; so I appreciate that we finally have it here.

[Hristo Botev]

@Jacob - To ask the Matrix question, in light of your (and, increasingly, my own) fatalist "position": Why not just stay in Plato's Cave?

To perhaps expound on this a bit, I had a fun discussion with my father-in-law on CC and resource depletion last night. My FIL is a very smart guy, an environmental engineer, and a Republican/conservative. At the beginning of our discussion he kept referring back to the fact that scientists have been predicting gloom and doom in terms of both CC and resource depletion since he was in grad school for engineering back in the early 70s, and it hasn't happened (to which DW spoke up and asked, hasn't it though?). My question to him, are you saying the theory is wrong (apologies, I don't have a technical background so I may not be using the right terminology), or just that the modeling and the timeframe was wrong? He had to concede it was the latter; but it was really apparent that to a large extent he's just been choosing to not think about it--i.e., here's a really smart guy who understands the science and has for 50 years who has simply opted to stay in Plato's Cave because, well, what's the alternative?

[Alphaville]

I'll just note that all this just confirms my "position" as a fatalist (not to be confused with defeatist) in these matters [...] it's impossible to live, act, or think in any other way than the shadow wall we're currently staring at before the cave literally starts flooding, burning, and running out of food or healthy air.

This means that current ideologies will not act until that time where the damage function exceeds the benefits of propagating the current beliefs and modes of behavior. The conditions that future generations will have to live under will subsequently be somewhat worse than they are at that time-point because of the (30-50 year) lag-time in the geophysical system.

so, @jacob, a question i’ve been meaning to ask you—by that description we seem to be suffering from the “frog in hot water” problem (that’s a myth about frogs, but nevertheless a useful image). disaster at this point is unavoidable.

so, where is it useful to focus next? mitigation/reduction? adaptation? escape? all of the above?

i’ve seen people throw up their hands and say “there’s nothing i can do, therefore it’s business as usual.” i remember from another conversation i understood thsr you saw the role of ere as similar to the medieval irish monasteries that served as repositories of civilization, except that in this case would not be aristotle’s books but rather technologies for (sustainable?) lifestyles under the new conditions. no?

what i guess i’m trying to get at, is, given your forecast, what is the strategy? people think of ere as a vehicle for “quitting work,” but that was never actually the point, right?

[daylen]

@alphaville I suspect that this train of thought is precisely what is keeping most frogs from seeing the pot. Focusing on the path of water/air currents or of other frogs blinds you to aggregate interactions or thermodynamic distinctions (between the water in the pot and the air outside it; separated by the pot itself).

In short focus on whatever you can until you are able to synthesize that with more, then repeat the process.

[jacob]

@HB - One way to resolve the cognitive dissonance is of course to ignore the problem or specialize only focusing on a narrow part of it. The Upton Sinclair quote about a professional and his salary comes to mind. This works until it doesn't---e.g. the day the hillside is on fire or a pandemic swipes 10% of the local town population with almost everybody complaining how "nobody saw this coming". My personal choice is best explained by

It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question.

However, some of the most bitter or cynical individuals in the environmental/ecological field are also those who have been engaged with it for the longest. I'd hate ending up having my feelings of disappointment with the situation end up being feelings of disgust. Yet that is the direction of the trend the longer one has been "in it".

The alternative here is the one promoted by Kingsnorth et al at the Dark Mountain project which is one of acceptance. After all, the future doesn't exist as such. Only our expectations do and if we can live and more importantly die with that knowledge, that is, accept it (the fatalism part) then it definitely becomes easier. (This also explains why people get increasingly bitter the longer their expectations have deviated from reality.) The other alternative is renewed faith in the religion of techno-optimism. Being a former "priest" in that religion and understanding the underlying factors of what zealots perceive as "magic", it's rather hard to swallow the blue pill on that anymore.

@Alphaville - ERE if done in the way I intended (as described in the book) solves for both mitigation and adaption on the individual level providing solutions both for a "brown tech"-future in the form of FIRE as well as other futures (lifeboat, green, ...) in the form of the renaissance skill set. COVID should have illustrated that cafeteria-style implementation happens at one's peril.

However, ERE is obviously not viable as a top-down solution since it requires each individual to make the shift by their own volition and so very many are just mentally chained to their $25k/year/person consumer lifestyles. Hence, the societal level strategy relies more on "hope" and emergence in the sense that if enough individuals manage to change their trajectory, the combined effect might actually matter, if nothing else to salvage some pieces.

[Hristo Botev]

or specialize only focusing on a narrow part of it.

Ha! My FIL knows everything there is to know about landfills and explosive ordinance disposal!

I really, really, really appreciate all the thoughts and answers and ideas you and everyone else has contributed here over the past 2 weeks. As I think I've mentioned previously, I haven't really slept much during that time, and my work life has been a shitshow (days like today where I get 2 hours of work done preceded by days like Wednesday where I have to knock out 14 hours of productivity to try and keep up). I've been the fool/pig on this issue for a long time, and it's been a difficult red pill for me to swallow--especially because I can't think of this issue without thinking of my kids, who are just so stinking optimistic and full of life and hope and joy. And I'd still be the fool/pig today had it not been for the rather arbitrary decision our parish made to pick "climate change" as the topic de jure for this workshop (could have just as easily been immigration, or racial justice)--and I knew you fine people could help educate me on the topic so I didn't go in to the workshop as the stereotypical bumbling redneck conservative (I mean, I'm still that, but I'm more informed on the topic now). Anyway, the discovery of Kingsnorth has been a bright spot for me (picked up The Wake from the library yesterday). And, in truth, believing Catholics are by dogma fatalists--it's a fallen world we live in, lest we forget. And I need look no further than St. Benedict to see that we've been down this road, in part, before; in the same manner that Kingsnorth starts his trilogy by looking back 1,000 years to the Norman invasion of England. Weirdly enough, there's comfort in that.

[Alphaville]

@alphaville I suspect that this train of thought is precisely what is keeping most frogs from seeing the pot. Focusing on the path of individual water molecules or of other frogs blinds you to aggregate interactions or thermodynamic distinctions (between the water in the pot and the air outside it; separated by the pot itself).

i don’t know that the issue needs to be fitted to the metaphor with such detail, but i agree with the criticism of the purely local, individualistic perspective. this is why i said in a previous post that i don’t see “conservative” (in the current american context: self-interested individualistic) solutions proposed to the climate problem, other that “it’s not happening.”

In short focus on whatever you can until you are able to synthesize that with more, then repeat the process.

focus? i have adhd

but i do what i can on my end, even though it’s never going to be sufficient. i’m curious about @jacob’s take on actionable items though since he keeps winning the (predictions) office pool. eta: ah, i see his reply now...

[daylen]

i don’t know that the issue needs to be fitted to the metaphor with such detail

It wasn't just for you.

[Alphaville]

However, ERE is obviously not viable as a top-down solution since it requires each individual to make the shift by their own volition and so very many are just mentally chained to their $25k/year/person consumer lifestyles. Hence, the societal level strategy relies more on "hope" and emergence in the sense that enough individuals manage to change their trajectory, the combined effect might actually matter.

i have “hope” in the sense that i do see the changes in younger people who will be most affected by it. problem seems to be they are under the control of a gerontocracy stuck in a 20th century (or even older) mindset.

you mentioned in your response to @hb the techno-magic solutions. without looking for salvation in the form of a machine messiah, i do keep an eye out for the possible hydrogen economy—both in the form of fusion reactors and fuel cells. which—you know, maybe, some day, ha haha. but i know there’s no such thing as santa claus.

anyway, thanks for the reply.

It wasn't just for you.

ok

[7Wannabe5]

OTOH, techno-realism would suggest that a 95% potential for a .5% chance at a win is greater than a .01% potential for a 100% chance at a win. IOW, techno-optimism is having faith in techno-fix, but techno-realism is just recognizing the likelihood that technology will keep developing into the next few decades.

[white belt]

i have “hope” in the sense that i do see the changes in younger people who will be most affected by it. problem seems to be they are under the control of a gerontocracy stuck in a 20th century (or even older) mindset.

I'm curious, what changes in younger people are you seeing?

I'm a member of the tail-end of the millenial generation and in my bubble I do not see any impactful changes being adopted by younger people on a large scale. Consumerism is still the religion of the USA, which means for the typical young American ultimately status, fulfillment, etc are almost all associated with consumption. Even the push for "equality" many times manifests itself as a young person wanting the fancy Tesla or widget that the wealthier people have. Young people spend hours scrolling and posting about consumer spending in terms of events and products on social media. Even if climate changed is acknowledged as a crisis, there is a complete disconnect that the consumer culture may be a driving cause. And even when recognizing the downsides of consumerism, most folks aren't willing to give up their brunch, gender reveal parties, expensive phones, and so on. I don't blame young people, there are just too many incentives for governments and corporations to keep the consumerism train rolling along.

In other words, the younger generation is generally exactly like their parents, who were sold on the idea of inevitable prosperity/progress. The reality is that this was all a bubble formed in part by fossil fuel extraction, and that in the next ~30 years in the US we will at best see a return to the standard of living that boomers grew up with (not to be confused with the much higher standard of living that boomers enjoyed in their adult life). In the rest of the world we will see mass famine and war over limited resources.

Edit: Keep in mind this stuff is hard and not something that's really discussed in typical circles* (hopefully as Jacob points out, the popularity of FIRE in the PF space has made an impact). I was exposed to ERE as an impressionable teenager, and it still took me years to really grok that ERE is as much about resiliency in an uncertain future brought on by climate change as it is a strategy to achieve financial independence and early retirement.

* I do think COVID19 may have served as a wake-up call for some folks

[Alphaville]

I'm curious, what changes in younger people are you seeing?

sure, consumerism is america’s religion, but still, this may just be the idealism of youth on display, and this might also be pure impression on my part, but as a gen-xer, i see more “conscious consumers” in the younger age brackets, i see more vegetarians and vegans (i eat meat, guilty as charged), i see more socialists and even self-proclaimed communists, i see a more politically involved cohort than us gen-xers, i see a widespread disdain for car culture, i see a much greater awareness and concern with global warming, and i see a greater concern with personal ethics as well. btw i don’t like socialism or much less communism, but when i find myself arguing with someone about it, it’s usually someone maybe ages 17-30. but what this points to, for me, os that maybe (maybe- wishful thinking?) they’re willing to sacrifice some personal comforts for the common good. they also seem nicer all around, kinder, less psychopathic. more weed and chillin, less alcohol and violence. more concer for social justice as well.

i’m talking about urban/suburban, college-educated or college bound kids anyway.

am i wrong in this assessment? i know boomers sold out, and my generation got burned by this and turned too cynical. millennials brought back earnestness.

[Mister Imperceptible]

I am toward the other end of Gen Y as white belt and it is seems to me that Gen Y is most earnest in being sold something. We have to convince ourselves and each that we are good, and that someone else can be blamed, and that if we can folk out with guitars around the bonfire, singing and clapping, we can figure out what the hell is happening. It is not about virtue (which is expensive), but rather virtue-signaling (which is cheap). The evidence of this is usually when someone confronts Gen Y’s narrative, their first instinct is not earnest self-reflection, but an earnest effort to cancel that person assaulting what they cling to as the “truth.” My (former) friends earnestly believe that it is right that what they do not agree with should be censored on Twitter and anyone who disagrees should be earnestly fired from their jobs. “ESG” is just like fashion, if you got the goods, they'll come and buy it just to stay in the clique. ESG is one of the greatest soft and hard sells the would-be technocratic dictatorship ever created. And Gen Y is earnestly buying.

In other words, Gen Y is the perfectly ignorant, vain, hypocritical, self-absorbed echo of the Boomers.

*****

Strange memories on this nervous night in Las Vegas. Five years later? Six? It seems like a lifetime, or at least a Main Era—the kind of peak that never comes again. San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special time and place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something. Maybe not, in the long run . . . but no explanation, no mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world. Whatever it meant. . . .

History is hard to know, because of all the hired bullshit, but even without being sure of “history” it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head in a long fine flash, for reasons that nobody really understands at the time—and which never explain, in retrospect, what actually happened.

My central memory of that time seems to hang on one or five or maybe forty nights—or very early mornings—when I left the Fillmore half-crazy and, instead of going home, aimed the big 650 Lightning across the Bay Bridge at a hundred miles an hour wearing L. L. Bean shorts and a Butte sheepherder's jacket . . . booming through the Treasure Island tunnel at the lights of Oakland and Berkeley and Richmond, not quite sure which turn-off to take when I got to the other end (always stalling at the toll-gate, too twisted to find neutral while I fumbled for change) . . . but being absolutely certain that no matter which way I went I would come to a place where people were just as high and wild as I was: No doubt at all about that. . . .

There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda. . . . You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning. . . .

And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. . . .

So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.

*****

It ain't no joke, I'd like to buy the world a toke
And teach the world to sing in perfect harmony
And teach the world to snuff the fires and the liars
Hey, I know it's just a song but it's spice for the recipe
This is a love attack, I know it went out but it's back
It's just like any fad, it retracts before impact
And just like fashion, it's a passion for the with it and hip
If you got the goods, they'll come and buy it just to stay in the clique

So don't delay, act now, supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive, six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow, there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned
You might as well be walkin' on the sun

Twenty-five years ago, they spoke out and they broke out
Of recession and oppression and together they toked
And they folked out with guitars around a bonfire
Just singin' and clappin', man, what the hell happened?
Then some were spellbound, some were hell bound
Some they fell down and some got back up
And fought back against the melt-down
And their kids were hippie chicks, all hypocrites
Because fashion is smashin' the true meaning of it

So don't delay, act now, supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive, six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow, there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned
You might as well be walkin' on the sun

It ain't no joke when our mama's handkerchief is soaked
With her tears because her baby's life has been revoked
The bond is broke up, so choke up and focus on the close up
Mr. Wizard can't perform no godlike hocus-pocus
So don't sit back, kick back and watch the world get bushwhacked
News at ten, your neighborhood is under attack
Put away the crack before the crack puts you away
You need to be there when your baby's old enough to relate

So don't delay, act now, supplies are running out
Allow if you're still alive, six to eight years to arrive
And if you follow, there may be a tomorrow
But if the offer's shunned
You might as well be walkin' on the sun