William Jefferson Clinton -4- Earth President
He would be the first black Earth President!
Why would it be easier to convince the world to give up the government they have and make it subject to some higher authority in order to do something about Climate Change than it would be to simply convince the world to do something about Climate Change with the governments they have?
No. I’d much rather see those cities wiped out than a “benevolent world dictator”. Hell, there are some of those cities I wouldn’t really mind seeing wiped out regardless of the “benevolent world dictator” alternative.
Well, yeah, getting rid of Florida would be beneficial…
I keed, I keed. I have some relatives in Florida. Including the crazy cousin that sends me racist propaganda on Facebook even though as a Hispanic with brown skin he and his family would be a target of the ones that are making that trash. I would not be surprised that he is also a climate change denier only because it comes with the political package of the ones that he is listening to.
Yep. If you had dedicated pluralities in favor of world government to fight climate change you wouldn’t need world government to fight climate change. You could just fight climate change.
Really, do you think Russian and Chinese leaders are going to hand over their hard-earned power to some supra-national governing body? Do you think American elites are going to support it? People will support supra-national government when they think they can get a better deal from the supra-national government than they can from the local government.
And how’s that going to work? The world government is democratically selected? Over half the people in the world don’t live in a country where their government is selected democratically. And suppose it was, 7 billion people voting for world government. Are we going to like the sorts of things that 1.2 billion Chinese people vote for?
World government, if it ever happens, will be the official recognition of a state of affairs that already exists. Either some sort of world conquest, or an evolutionary end state of something like the European Union, where people wake up after 50 or 100 years of not caring about national borders and decide to do away with fictions that were irrelevant decades ago. In a world with both North and South Dakota that’s a long way off.
If world government is needed to stop The End of the World, then the End of the World cannot be stopped. Government is a human activity, and it requires human beings to create it. Yes, a dedicated minority can force their will on a disorganized majority. That would require quite a lot of dedication, and the sort of people willing to undertake such actions tend to skew in a direction you might not be comfortable with.
IMHO the dictators of the world will become more aware that in a world were climate change could get worse a fate like Kadaffy found could come to them. So I think that they will know what is at stake.
The danger for democracies is that as troubles increase then it would be more likely that very unsavoury characters would try to take control of the governments. And that is why I also think then that democracies will realize what is at stake.
Let’s face it – AGW has been diminished into a partisan wedge issue like abortion or gun control, science notwithstanding.
Get used to it…
I got used to it, it is not everyday where one can find a subject that shows who is the more serious party nowadays. Unwittingly the powerful interests that managed to make this a litmus test for the Republican party made it easy to identify who we should not be electing to office, IMHO the scientists that are or were Republican are the canaries in the coal mine. And they demonstrate dramatically that indeed this issue was not really a partisan one.
The canaries are “dying” at the hands of the Republicans and that should tell us what it needs to be done; it is not only just personal efforts that makes a difference, our votes are very important to get people in power to enable change, and those votes are important not only just for Americans now.
It’s a really hard problem. Maybe not one that can be solved in our lifetimes.
Which is a pity, because it would be nice to only have one world currency and no need for passports or travel vaccinations.
:dubious:
Are you talking about Gaddafi, the late leader of Libya?
You think someone with the title “Dictator of the World” should be afraid that his convoy will be bombed by a coalition of British, French, and American aircraft and rebels will rape him with a stick and shoot him because he didn’t fix climate change?
What’s the point of being “Dictator of the World” if you’re going to let the British, French, and Americans keep their air forces? Think of all the tons of CO2 those emit with every flight hour! :eek:
Missing the point, none of the above, the point was that a dictator of the world is not needed to deal with the issue, because both the dictatorships and democracies will have their own reasons to make the changes needed regarding global warming gas emissions and the need to adapt.
You’re the one that brought up Gaddafi, right? The only thing dictators need to really fear is that the USA will get a bee in their bonnet about throwing them out of power. If that happens, they stand an excellent chance of ending up like Saddam, Gaddafi, or Mubarak. Climate change? You think dictators care about climate change?
They are dummies if they ignore it.
I find that whole comic a bit ridiculous (might I say, “comical”?). “The protests spread following the path of the drought”? Really? This is the Greens straining a little too hard.
Syria is going to have a TON of problems over the next 35 years. I doubt that losing agricultural capacity ranks very highly in any Syrian’s list of concerns. They’ve become the de facto live bombing range for many of the world’s first-rate militaries, and have cities full of live shoot houses for several of the world’s second-rate militaries. ISIS uses one of their cities as their capital, in which they regularly commit horrific atrocities. They’ve got Turkmen fighting Alawites, Iranians fighting Sunnis, Turkey fighting Kurds, Russian jets and helicopters getting shot down, American and French bombing ISIS, Israelis bombing Hezbollah, etc. Climate change isn’t on anyone’s radar over there.
Not too hard, the makers of the comic did not pull the main idea out of thin air.
And that is missing the point too, what you describe is not denied at all and see the west getting more involved now as there is a pressing problem, but you need to look up the definition of “factor” and the subject here is precisely climate change, it is a factor in conflicts that will get more important the longer there is not a concerted effort to minimize the results.
I have seen your false dilemma argument before but it only amounts to declare that we can not walk and chew gum at the same time.
You’re not removing the need for passports or travel vaccinations. Yellow fever isn’t going away just because you declare the world a single nation.
And who says the world government won’t require passports to travel? China and the Soviet Union required internal passports for citizens. You couldn’t just move to Moscow or Beijing or leave your collective farm. You had to have permission.
As for a world currency, who cares? A currency union is not exactly all sunshine and roses, as Greece and Germany are finding. Local currencies allow local areas a lot of freedom to harmonize fiscal policy with economic reality. The problem is that local leaders often abuse that power and cause horrible inflation and whatnot. The answer to that is the local people use a “foreign” reserve currency for day to day transaction. But even today multiple currencies are much less of a hassle than they used to be. You can just pay for things via electronic payments that can be accepted all over the world, and it doesn’t matter what currency the payment is denominated in, you pay using your local currency out of your bank account. It’s not like the old days where you had to find a currency exchange and bring a wad of francs to turn them into piles of deutchmarks. Most transactions in first world countries are electronic payments.
And as for vaccinations, vaccinations are required because some parts of the world have certain serious endemic diseases, and if you travel there without protection you might get sick. Infectious diseases don’t respect national boundaries. It’s not like malaria or ebola get magically eradicated from Liberia the day they get annexed into a supra-national state.
You won’t need passports, because you won’t be travelling. Too much carbon dioxide produced.
Don’t like it? Nobody asked you - the Earth President says so.
Regards,
Shodan
Meanwhile, all those animals can just suck it? I’m personally not just concerned for the human cost. I like the idea of a diverse biosphere, and not just because I like swimming in non-slimy seas.
I do too, I just think a lot more people are convinced by the selfish human-centric argument then an environment-centric argument. And it’s my primary concern too – I value human life far, far more than any other life. And inaccurate hyperbole that asserts that human damage would be anything more than a tiny blip to Earth and the biosphere in general in the long run (though countless individual species could undoubtedly be lost) is counterproductive, in my opinion, since it’s easy to refute.