Great to see this. My own research also guided me towards critical criminology. But the core of corruption is in the global banking system, which is effectively a Ponzi-scheme, being the main driver of an exponentially escalating polycrisis.
@@davehendricks4824 yelp and the main stream media are owned by the same group of elite now that Trumps coming back main stream media will never say global warming and climate change will be limited if allowed at all that go's back to Ronald Region. Jimmy Carter gave a serious warning speech over climate change in the 70s when we could have made a difference. We had one president that actually was watching out for those he swore to protect from there on out presidents work for those big corporate doners
Too many in the judiciary are complicit. But we need to join together, organize and take to the parliaments and streets. Hand in hand with deliberative democracy.
Corporate Directors and CEO's CFO's and so on have responsibilities they often sidestep by contracting out certain work. This may also need to be addressed. The other aspect is Enforcement. Who can be entrusted with that old chestnut? Just some thoughts from an ex Citi bank officer of the 1980s living in a neoliberal capitalist 5 eyes country during the 1980s when neoliberalism hit the community like a nuclear bomb shell. Who is to be trusted? But Go For It!! Great ideas, don't hold back. Have close relations with XR and Just Stop Oil. The more the better. Thanks Rachel good one indeed!
This seems like an oversimplified argument and ignores the Maximum Power Principle which would suggest an inevitability to our exploitation of resources either equitably and 'legally' or inequitably and illegally. Either way, it makes little difference. Also the CFCs argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny firstly as the ozone layes is still in jeopardy and secondly tackling it at the time didn't require a fundamental rethink of the economy from root to tip. Many thanks for the videos Rachel
Thought experiment: Had the use of fossil fuels and the wealth produced been shared equally would we be having the same discussion about our collective criminality?🤔
@@danielcolman5064 Yes, look at the environmental damage and pollution generated by the communist regimes of the Soviet Union and China. The problem is the fossil fuel based industrial - technological civilization rather than capitalism, the latter of course is still a problem however. Also one must consider the dire poverty and social injustices suffered by the working class and peasants prior to the age of FFs. FFs lifted billions out of extreme poverty.
Global human population of 8 billion people is only possible with industrial civilization and industrial civilization can only exist with the massive energy inputs fossil fuels provide, so the argument could just as easily be made that fossil fuel companies have enabled human life to flourish. The notion that industrial civilization can persist without fossil fuels is deeply delusional. We are locked on to the path we are on, regardless of the catastrophes we may be hurtling towards.
Feeding 8 billion people without fossil fuels, if you're stuck on doing it exactly the way we do now in the west, is obviously not possible and no one claims it is. But we only eat exactly the way we do now because of how effective advertising is, how much profit can be made selling us addictive shit that kills us, and how deeply entrenched and influential fossil fuels and big ag are, which allows them to stack incentives even more in their favor. Feeding 8 billion people without fossil fuels is absolutely possible outside of imposing that super restrictive framing on all 8 billion people, most of whom don't eat like that now anyway - there's lots of ideas and rigorous studies out there on ways how, it's worth checking out just to know what options are available
@@davebourgeois5022 Industrial agriculture produces carbohydrates by moderating hydrocarbons via industrial chemical processes and the metabolism of plants. Synthetic ammonia fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, mechanized agricultural production and complex highly attenuated supply and distribution systems would not be possible without fossil fuels; The caloric production yields needed to sustain a human population of 8 B could not be produced without industrial agricultural methods.
@@davebourgeois5022 But we wouldn't have 8 billion people on the planet without FFs. Ergo, without FFs, we will not have 8 billion people on the planet. Other scenarios are science fiction contradicted by all previous civilizational history. It's not about how much food you could grow, but about how many calories are returned on calories invested.
Corpirate liability limitation / evasion priviledges must be suspended, stripped away, revoked, repudiated in cases of negligence, criminality, breach-of-trust and pushed onto the directors, executives, voting shareholders right to the individual personal level
Money does make people do selfish things. I get it. But even though I am liberal on many fronts, I also hold some "actual" libertarian views (not the perverse ones that some self-proclaimed "libertarians" espouse that are actually ultra-right positions...) Anyway, that's my preamble. To hold Big Oil accountable, thinking we can do it in some similar manner as we sorta held Big Tobacco accountable... is foolish and disingenuous. I was a cigarette smoker for many years - and I am today paying the price for MY DECISION to smoke cigarettes. It's not like I couldn't read the warning on each pack I bought or could not connect the funerals of relatives who died of lung cancer to their relationship with tobacco. That's on ME. I have also owned many cars in my life because I needed them to commute to work or to the store or whatever. Is the oil company that produced the gasoline that I CHOSE TO CONSUME to blame for that production? I guess litigation is a tactic to put pressure on oil companies to become what?... More environmental? If you want to help the earth and the climate and ecosystem, encourage your youngish neighbors to buy some condoms or have a tube snipped. We have over 8 billion people on this planet. What could we possibly expect to happen from that number? Unicorns and Rainbows? Look in the mirror. Corporations own the politics and the politicians. But in most places, people actually have a vote. And the ability to buy some condoms.
We all inherited a system designed to maximize the use of fossil fuels. Not to preserve them or conserve them. Within that system choices have been limited. It's a mistake to think the market has the built in feedback which would give individual purchases leverage.
@@singingway I appreciate your reply and agree we live in a system that has been made perverse by monied interests. And to some degree there is "inheritance." My point is: we do have agency. Any significant change for the better that's occurred in this country and countries around the world has been when people demand that change. My other point is that people can (and now are in bigger numbers) choosing to have fewer children. Which is good. Let's persist with that trend.
Capitalists are doing what they are supposed to do - maximize profit. So long as we organize ourselves along economic lines and that means capitalism, the system will always override the concerns or wishes of the people. In large part the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Whether people are rich or poor, thrive or die is irrelevant and immaterial. If a capitalist fails to maximize profit it is easy enough to replace them. It's also a very simple system, just make profit. People like that. The interesting point is has capitalism entered an end phase or is it mutating. From a classical viewpoint monopolies are not supposed to exist; a free market should have meant that as profit rises in a sector other companies/corporations should have entered and competed. Unfortunately the playing field is not level and both pro and anti elements have introduced distortions. Corporations are better at playing that game as they have more resources, i.e. time and money; after all the house (bank) always wins.
I highly doubt that you could get murder charges approved, I mean if we use the same logic then would not any consumer alcohol company would be liable for the actions of the intoxicated? I suppose you could argue that climate change is systemic in our planetary complex system and alcoholism is more individualized
Fighter jets, tanks, and naval vessels don't run on cfc's. Comparing a crucial energy input to the world economy and every military on earth to a class of refrigeration chemicals is not a serious argument.
what a moron-stooge!! the prevention of unremitted critical harm to the Ozone Layer by means of global cooperation and action was and is a prime directive your facile credulous unconscious elevation of militarism as the prime directive is pathological i won't bother elaborating since you are unlikely to have the moral ethical integrity to comprehend/accept
In theory it should work, but depends on who is making the laws, or altering them and the ability of those making claims against those who are not acting in everyones interest. I have been watching and commenting and ignoring some of Elon's tweets, if he was really concerned there would be lots of engineering solutions, proposals, on how to control the fire situation, instead like a childish complainer, so and so didn't do so and so. I did see his tone alter after a few comments, but then go back to the political rant slant, but that is a political thing trying to appease the sides. Isn't DOGE going to cut government? But its easier to criticize others, for cutting government expenditures, I don't get it. Well I do really, they want total control, and they can put down those who they oppose through slander (the opposite party), they want their own people in, and being critical and cutting others down, as there wasn't 10,000 fire trucks standing by... so that is the way to do that, accusing and making accusations. Aaron seemed like a decent fellow, seems like it would take some doing and probably a lot of money, the will and the backing of a lot of people as he says. Small order. I think if people get pissed off enough they will back it. Sometimes letting it play out a little bit, getting some truthful information out, using ai seems interesting, timing is the big one. For the heck of it I asked ai how much water a fire truck needed to operate. Told me 500 gallons per minute with 2 1/2" supply pipe min, preferably with a 3" pipe, multiply by 500 trucks pumping water (just guessing 1000 deployed maybe not all pumping) and allow for pressure drop, figure the cross sectional area of the pipe to get the sizing of the mains, and storage requirements based on how long you need to supply said fire trucks (500 trucks = 250,000 gallons per minute, or 15 million gallons an hour not considering pressure drops etc), and why not a de-salinity plant, would solve a lot of problems. Try to get that paid for, California already has extremely high taxes. Probably no one designed the water system to handle thousands of houses on fire at the same time.... Probably nothing gets done soon by the wonder team, as they will be distracted by hitting the ground undoing laws. Could be a lawyers dream though.
Paul Beckwith has an interesting video on the recent fire with a more practical solution to water is for people to put in pumps and sprinkler system and since just about everyone has pools that would be the water supply. Likewise people next to the ocean would use seawater
I know what you mean, and there have been a few on this channel. But I don't think grifter is the right term - these people do seem to believe in what they are selling. Bill Clinton said something along the lines of ain't nothin wrong with murica that can't be fixed by what's right with murica. These people think that is true.
Great to see this. My own research also guided me towards critical criminology. But the core of corruption is in the global banking system, which is effectively a Ponzi-scheme, being the main driver of an exponentially escalating polycrisis.
There’s definitely a BIG relationship between big oil and our oil soaked government.
@@davehendricks4824 yelp and the main stream media are owned by the same group of elite now that Trumps coming back main stream media will never say global warming and climate change will be limited if allowed at all that go's back to Ronald Region. Jimmy Carter gave a serious warning speech over climate change in the 70s when we could have made a difference. We had one president that actually was watching out for those he swore to protect from there on out presidents work for those big corporate doners
And also, global warming is nonsense.
@@davehendricks4824
Fossil fuels are a gift from God
Too many in the judiciary are complicit. But we need to join together, organize and take to the parliaments and streets. Hand in hand with deliberative democracy.
"Wealth is addictive, the rich will eventually destroy society" -Socrates and friends (paraphrasing)
Corporate Directors and CEO's CFO's and so on have responsibilities they often sidestep by contracting out certain work. This may also need to be addressed. The other aspect is Enforcement. Who can be entrusted with that old chestnut? Just some thoughts from an ex Citi bank officer of the 1980s living in a neoliberal capitalist 5 eyes country during the 1980s when neoliberalism hit the community like a nuclear bomb shell. Who is to be trusted? But Go For It!! Great ideas, don't hold back. Have close relations with XR and Just Stop Oil. The more the better. Thanks Rachel good one indeed!
This seems like an oversimplified argument and ignores the Maximum Power Principle which would suggest an inevitability to our exploitation of resources either equitably and 'legally' or inequitably and illegally. Either way, it makes little difference. Also the CFCs argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny firstly as the ozone layes is still in jeopardy and secondly tackling it at the time didn't require a fundamental rethink of the economy from root to tip. Many thanks for the videos Rachel
Thought experiment: Had the use of fossil fuels and the wealth produced been shared equally would we be having the same discussion about our collective criminality?🤔
@@danielcolman5064but it didn't happen. Hypotheticals are just delays.
@@danielcolman5064
Yes, look at the environmental damage and pollution generated by the communist regimes of the Soviet Union and China. The problem is the fossil fuel based industrial - technological civilization rather than capitalism, the latter of course is still a problem however. Also one must consider the dire poverty and social injustices suffered by the working class and peasants prior to the age of FFs. FFs lifted billions out of extreme poverty.
@@gregoryjames165 "FFs lifted billions out of extreme poverty."
And you're arguing that that's a problem?
Global human population of 8 billion people is only possible with industrial civilization and industrial civilization can only exist with the massive energy inputs fossil fuels provide, so the argument could just as easily be made that fossil fuel companies have enabled human life to flourish. The notion that industrial civilization can persist without fossil fuels is deeply delusional. We are locked on to the path we are on, regardless of the catastrophes we may be hurtling towards.
Feeding 8 billion people without fossil fuels, if you're stuck on doing it exactly the way we do now in the west, is obviously not possible and no one claims it is. But we only eat exactly the way we do now because of how effective advertising is, how much profit can be made selling us addictive shit that kills us, and how deeply entrenched and influential fossil fuels and big ag are, which allows them to stack incentives even more in their favor.
Feeding 8 billion people without fossil fuels is absolutely possible outside of imposing that super restrictive framing on all 8 billion people, most of whom don't eat like that now anyway - there's lots of ideas and rigorous studies out there on ways how, it's worth checking out just to know what options are available
@@davebourgeois5022 Industrial agriculture produces carbohydrates by moderating hydrocarbons via industrial chemical processes and the metabolism of plants. Synthetic ammonia fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, mechanized agricultural production and complex highly attenuated supply and distribution systems would not be possible without fossil fuels; The caloric production yields needed to sustain a human population of 8 B could not be produced without industrial agricultural methods.
@@davebourgeois5022 But we wouldn't have 8 billion people on the planet without FFs. Ergo, without FFs, we will not have 8 billion people on the planet. Other scenarios are science fiction contradicted by all previous civilizational history. It's not about how much food you could grow, but about how many calories are returned on calories invested.
"Perhaps it's just a part of it, we've got to fulfil the book".......
❤
Does the Energy Charter Treaty give the courts an inability to protect humans? Are their profits that protected???😳
Money makes CRIMINALS look good as well as good at making Laws
Corpirate liability limitation / evasion priviledges must be suspended, stripped away, revoked, repudiated
in cases of negligence, criminality, breach-of-trust and pushed onto the directors, executives, voting shareholders
right to the individual personal level
Money does make people do selfish things. I get it. But even though I am liberal on many fronts, I also hold some "actual" libertarian views (not the perverse ones that some self-proclaimed "libertarians" espouse that are actually ultra-right positions...) Anyway, that's my preamble. To hold Big Oil accountable, thinking we can do it in some similar manner as we sorta held Big Tobacco accountable... is foolish and disingenuous. I was a cigarette smoker for many years - and I am today paying the price for MY DECISION to smoke cigarettes. It's not like I couldn't read the warning on each pack I bought or could not connect the funerals of relatives who died of lung cancer to their relationship with tobacco. That's on ME. I have also owned many cars in my life because I needed them to commute to work or to the store or whatever. Is the oil company that produced the gasoline that I CHOSE TO CONSUME to blame for that production? I guess litigation is a tactic to put pressure on oil companies to become what?... More environmental? If you want to help the earth and the climate and ecosystem, encourage your youngish neighbors to buy some condoms or have a tube snipped. We have over 8 billion people on this planet. What could we possibly expect to happen from that number? Unicorns and Rainbows? Look in the mirror. Corporations own the politics and the politicians. But in most places, people actually have a vote. And the ability to buy some condoms.
We all inherited a system designed to maximize the use of fossil fuels. Not to preserve them or conserve them. Within that system choices have been limited. It's a mistake to think the market has the built in feedback which would give individual purchases leverage.
@@singingway I appreciate your reply and agree we live in a system that has been made perverse by monied interests. And to some degree there is "inheritance." My point is: we do have agency. Any significant change for the better that's occurred in this country and countries around the world has been when people demand that change. My other point is that people can (and now are in bigger numbers) choosing to have fewer children. Which is good. Let's persist with that trend.
This new stratagem might just turn around and bite this new energy zealots in the behind in a hundred years or so.
Capitalists are doing what they are supposed to do - maximize profit. So long as we organize ourselves along economic lines and that means capitalism, the system will always override the concerns or wishes of the people. In large part the system is doing what it's supposed to do. Whether people are rich or poor, thrive or die is irrelevant and immaterial. If a capitalist fails to maximize profit it is easy enough to replace them. It's also a very simple system, just make profit. People like that. The interesting point is has capitalism entered an end phase or is it mutating. From a classical viewpoint monopolies are not supposed to exist; a free market should have meant that as profit rises in a sector other companies/corporations should have entered and competed. Unfortunately the playing field is not level and both pro and anti elements have introduced distortions. Corporations are better at playing that game as they have more resources, i.e. time and money; after all the house (bank) always wins.
I highly doubt that you could get murder charges approved, I mean if we use the same logic then would not any consumer alcohol company would be liable for the actions of the intoxicated? I suppose you could argue that climate change is systemic in our planetary complex system and alcoholism is more individualized
Some CEO's have to go... Calling Luigi goes to far but what else?
Fighter jets, tanks, and naval vessels don't run on cfc's. Comparing a crucial energy input to the world economy and every military on earth to a class of refrigeration chemicals is not a serious argument.
what a moron-stooge!!
the prevention of unremitted critical harm to the Ozone Layer by means of global cooperation and action
was and is a prime directive
your facile credulous unconscious elevation of militarism as the prime directive is pathological
i won't bother elaborating since you are unlikely to have the moral ethical integrity to comprehend/accept
No but it never was a direct comparison and it is a comparable precedent in tackling harmful emissions from technology
I think you are scraping the barrel a bit here
In theory it should work, but depends on who is making the laws, or altering them and the ability of those making claims against those who are not acting in everyones interest. I have been watching and commenting and ignoring some of Elon's tweets, if he was really concerned there would be lots of engineering solutions, proposals, on how to control the fire situation, instead like a childish complainer, so and so didn't do so and so. I did see his tone alter after a few comments, but then go back to the political rant slant, but that is a political thing trying to appease the sides. Isn't DOGE going to cut government? But its easier to criticize others, for cutting government expenditures, I don't get it. Well I do really, they want total control, and they can put down those who they oppose through slander (the opposite party), they want their own people in, and being critical and cutting others down, as there wasn't 10,000 fire trucks standing by... so that is the way to do that, accusing and making accusations. Aaron seemed like a decent fellow, seems like it would take some doing and probably a lot of money, the will and the backing of a lot of people as he says. Small order. I think if people get pissed off enough they will back it. Sometimes letting it play out a little bit, getting some truthful information out, using ai seems interesting, timing is the big one. For the heck of it I asked ai how much water a fire truck needed to operate. Told me 500 gallons per minute with 2 1/2" supply pipe min, preferably with a 3" pipe, multiply by 500 trucks pumping water (just guessing 1000 deployed maybe not all pumping) and allow for pressure drop, figure the cross sectional area of the pipe to get the sizing of the mains, and storage requirements based on how long you need to supply said fire trucks (500 trucks = 250,000 gallons per minute, or 15 million gallons an hour not considering pressure drops etc), and why not a de-salinity plant, would solve a lot of problems. Try to get that paid for, California already has extremely high taxes. Probably no one designed the water system to handle thousands of houses on fire at the same time.... Probably nothing gets done soon by the wonder team, as they will be distracted by hitting the ground undoing laws. Could be a lawyers dream though.
Paul Beckwith has an interesting video on the recent fire with a more practical solution to water is for people to put in pumps and sprinkler system and since just about everyone has pools that would be the water supply. Likewise people next to the ocean would use seawater
Another grifter
I know what you mean, and there have been a few on this channel. But I don't think grifter is the right term - these people do seem to believe in what they are selling. Bill Clinton said something along the lines of ain't nothin wrong with murica that can't be fixed by what's right with murica. These people think that is true.
Unsubbed a load of illogical bile from stop oil anarchists wasting tomato soup and allowing no other opinion.
Class war won't end in your favor Bot.
Nature really doesn't care about your opinions, dude. You can't stop what's coming. It ain't all waiting on you. That's vanity