• Even if you are right I’ll take doing the right thing for the wrong reasons over the fucking disappointment and self destruction coming from the United States.

    Doesn’t matter how you spin it, China is objectively better for the world right now.

    You can feel morally superior all the way to societal collapse

            • well hello there, chinese intelligence officer.

              we in the western civilization are usually getting paid for our work and don’t consider that as discreditation of said work. also, the author of the book, is, among others, researcher at Harvard, so he is the literal scientist.

              Michael Pillsbury is the director of the Center on Chinese Strategy at the Hudson Institute and has served in presidential administrations from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama. Educated at Stanford and Columbia Universities, he is a former analyst at the RAND Corporation and research fellow at Harvard and has served in senior positions in the Defense Department and on the staff of four U.S. Senate committees. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He lives in Washington, D.C.

              •  leftytighty   ( @leftytighty@slrpnk.net ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                11 hours ago

                How is it appropriate to make comparisons between nations without normalizing for the population?

                Frankly, accusing me of manipulation makes me no longer care what you have to say. You can fuck off.

                • How is it appropriate to make comparisons between nations without normalizing for the population?

                  when you have big part of country that is rural and don’t participate in generating the emissions and profiting from them, then including them in the total count to artificially decrease final per capita number is just manipulation.

                  but my point here was you carefully selected one graph and presented it without context to support incorrect conclusion. but you know that, right?

                  Frankly, accusing me of manipulation makes me no longer care what you have to say. You can fuck off.

                  so you have no rebuttal to graphs i showed you, so you are suddenly not talking to me. that’s understandable, whatever exit strategy works for you, clown…

                  • You’re here being an asshole with a chip on your shoulder so I’m giving you the same energy. Comparing the total output of a 2 billion pop nation with a nation 20% of that size is a pretty dumb way to compare statistics and the progress of a country’s green transition.

                    I can’t give you a stats curriculum on lemmy when you are also being a huge dick.

    • You’re right in that the whole drill-baby-drill thing is utter self-destruction which may still work passably over the course of the next four years but not beyond. The IRA right now is solid industrial policy and I wish us Europeans were competing. (Wild guess though, the repeal of the IRA will go much like the repeal of the ACA last time around.)

      However, my point is that China is in a phase where it’s doing more with more, and its motivation is such that that will stay that way. The only reason Chinese emissions are stagnating right now is that their economy is faltering. At this point, the Jevons paradox is simply eating their renewable power/electric car/… gains. Granted, that is preferable to them continuing to buy ever more fossil-fueled cars.

      The motivation for producing this technology will, to a degree, determine the outcome: Solar panels off Temu, delivered to your doorstep using a fossil-fueled plane are a thing that exists.

      What happens when the importing blocs (US and EU) rethink their climate policy (because right-wing morons think that’s a good idea)? Chinese products will adapt quickly.