this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
173 points (96.8% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
7400 readers
583 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
China will win. Because they plan years to decades ahead and theyre constantly building, advancing, progressing. The US only plans as far ahead as the next quarter. Our only concern is shareholder returns. Nary a thought to environmental degradation, the state of the domestic economy, the goodwill of their citizens. The long term viability of our economy is entirely at the whims of a couple dozen inhuman ghouls with enough money to buy the moon. And as long as they get everything they want our government will let us starve and die in the street.
China will lose for the same reason the United States is losing. Making decisions that benefit people generally, either short term or long term, is exactly what autocracies are terrible at. For all the 'green washing' of China's domestic policy, they are tacitly supporting and funding a war of aggression in Ukraine, and expanding their military in order to annex Taiwan. If their goal was ecological harmony, neither of those things would make sense.
China's central leadership will burn their nation's children to fuel their expansionist ideology, not to mention coal or petrol. Incandescent lightbulbs and disposable plastic is peanuts compared to incandescent diesel tanks and disposable jets.
The 'China is winning' headline is effective clickbait for jingoistic nationalists, but it's misguided to think fanning a national spirit of competition will change US government policy against the will of US national corporate interests. The United States and Chinese government are the same parasite with different flags.
Autocracies are not inherently terrible at anything in particular, except a stable system of governance across generations. Autocrats are perfectly capable of prioritising the people, and there are many cases in history of them doing so.
That's honestly hard to judge. China hasn't entered an actual modern war, so it's hard to tell how ruthless their war leadership will be when they actually take losses. Especially considering Chinese culture and the 1-child policy, high casualties might provoke a domestic retaliation.
They're certainly expansionist, and their neighbours are being very wary of them with extremely good cause.
They have more than one goal, like any other country. Ecological harmony may not be at the top of the priority list, but they're making significant progress on that front. Whether that's due to genuine concern for the environment or a desire to sell stuff to the rest of the world doesn't matter.
That doesn't make it any less true. It's pretty undeniable that China is catching up or pulling ahead on many fronts, and the US under Trump is determined to squander whatever remaining advantage they have.
There's a reason this is always the exception and not the rule. Let me introduce you to The Rules for Rulers by CGP Grey, based on the book The Dictator's Handbook.
While I'm sure it's probably a very interesting book, I'm not watching an entire video or reading a book just to figure out if you have a point to contribute in an ongoing discussion. Cite it or use it as a source sure, but not just throw random media titles around with no context.
I'm not asking you to read a book, but if you've never heard of CGP Grey before nor seen his short Rules for Rulers video, you're missing out.
I'm not a video guy. Honestly, the book synopsis sounds interesting and I'll probably put it on my reading list. Videos in general are a no no for me.