Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DemocracyMouse

(2,275 posts)
Sat Mar 16, 2019, 02:27 PM Mar 2019

Saving the planet is not radical. Killing it is radical.

Stop being a "propaganda loser" and calling every sensible Democratic proposal "radical." The Green New Deal and other planet-friendly and people-friendly ideas are actually a RETURN to mid-20th century pragmatism. Our economy BOOMED when the New Deal was launched. Our skies and waterways CLEARED when the Environmental Protection Agency (launched under a Republican administration) began regulating industry. Our citizens had a fighting chance at advancement when we invested properly in public education. ALL THOSE THINGS ARE TRADITIONAL, SENSIBLE POLICIES.

Here's how a traditional approach to the planet's worst nightmare plays out:

1) Burn oil and coal.
2) Put soot in air.
3) Burn more fossil fuels.
4) Blanket planet in a thick layer of gases which traps heat, warms oceans, stirs up hurricanes...
5) OIL COMPANIES AND THE 1% (the radically over-leveredged) BUY THEIR WAY INTO SHRINKING PLANETARY SAFE ZONES.

Then the pendulum swings back to sanity:

6) CITIZENS WAKE UP, STOP WATCHING FOOTBALL AND RADICAL CLOWN PRESIDENTS, AND NOTICE THAT SCIENTISTS EXIST.
7) Citizens listen to these sensible, non-radical people and pressure ALL candidates to make "addressing global warming" a high priority.
8) Better yet, citizens pressure ALL candidates to link investment in clean, cheap solar energy with a return to traditional tax rates and traditional levels of investment in civic infrastructure like education, public transportation and even civic architecture.
9) Greenhouse gases subside. Worst outcomes avoided.

We may not return to a pastoral 18th century, but the worst outcomes are avoided and our grandchildren will thank us. (Assuming we listen to the sensible scientists, not the radical clowns).

Reducing greenhouse gases is sensible, scientific and doable. Empathetic stewardship of the Earth is even a tradition in all the world's religions.

Let's stop wasting time on the Great Clown and get this traditional priority back in the saddle.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Saving the planet is not ...