Because neoliberalism works by making voters worry about what they will lose now instead of what they might lose a few decades later if some entrepreneurial miracle doesn’t happen. Unfortunately, that now includes the ability to have a wage that provides them with a roof and food everyday, so it’s still not a top concern.
Enidigm
6219
Maybe it’s not surprising then conservatives in the West are desperately trying to turn their heads away from problems they cannot blame on others.
While I understand the frustration in principle, I don’t really see how an extended debate among the Democratic contenders would have any beneficial impact at all. Some would inevitably position themselves in the right place (that this is a slow-motion catastrophe already taking place) while others jockeyed to be to the right of those people on the issue. The likely end result would be that the correct candidates got pilloried for promising to destroy the economy etc while those who moderated their position would gain popularity at their expense. And the resulting Dem candidate would be saddled by the Republicans with all the baggage from that debate and be cast as a bomb-throwing revolutionary out to return us to the Stone Age.
Neoliberalism is undoubtedly aided in this by the fact that life works like that, too.
Sharpe
6222
The bigger problem is with the GOP and that’s where the frustration should be aimed. There is a broad consensus in the Democratic party to take action on climate change, with blue states like California actually taking meaningful steps. The exact form of action to take is subject to debate but there is no meaningful portion of the Democratic party that wants to do nothing and deny everything the way the GOP does. There is a moderate milquetoast faction within the Dems, to be sure, and factions more concerned with certain specific issues, but in general the Dems are on the right side of the climate debate.
The problem in the US is that the GOP comprises a big chunk of the electorate, and unfortunately a majority of the positions of power in the US at the present, and they are adamantly living in denial, planning to do nothing to prevent or mitigate climate change, breaking past promises and treaties, and not just failing to act but in many ways making things worse actively. They are the problem.
Once the Dems have more power, frustration can be aimed at the foot-dragging factions of the Dems, etc., but until then, the frustration needs to be aimed at the GOP. They are the root of the problem with their denial and head-in-sand-ism, they are the key bottleneck on taking action, and on top of all that they are actively making things worse. The GOP must lose power, in as much of the country as that is feasible. If that doesn’t happen, all of the Democratic concern and frustration in the universe means nothing.
RichVR
6223
I find them frustrating for different reasons. It’s sound bites and generalities. They have to essentially walk the line between reason and pandering. The debates are more about positioning in the horse race. Not at all about important realities. Imagine if Warren or Biden harped upon climate change?
Watch the numbers drop.
Debates are for people that either, like the fights or want to see their guy get in a good one.
The debates against the other party aren’t much better.
Timex
6224
A big part of this is just because they are allowing so many idiots on stage.
You can’t have a real debate with 10 freaking people.
RichVR
6225
Agreed. Culling needs to happen sooner/
I think rhetorical emphasis trickles down. If the debates treat climate change as a secondary issue, which they do, I think that has an impact on the perception among the electorate and the media. And again, we have to be pessimistic and assume that even given a 2020 WH victory, a Democratic president/Congress is likely to have one shot to effect real change. There’s no indication that climate will get that focus. I think it will end up being red headed stepchild again, though of course whatever a Democratic president does will be far better than what Trump does.
Basically, alarm bells should be sounding everywhere, but there’s still a sense of the IPCC screaming in a room where people are only half-listening. This is tragic.
That would be about as useful as being frustrated with Ebola, to put it bluntly.
Nations can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. One particular representative is managing to get pretty good funding thanks to the GND.
Where is the GOP on all this? Do they get an out because they are all fucktards?
I think this is probably true, if for no other reason than that Joe Manchin is going to be the median Senate vote on climate change in any possible Democratic Senate. But a Democratic debate in which some candidates talk about what we really ought to do probably produces a President much less inclined or able to do anything.
If every constituent were like those in AOC’s district, significant climate change action would already be happening. If e.g. FDR runs in 1940 on taking the US into a European war, he probably loses. Polling at the time showed that, in the absence of the war, a narrow majority of voters preferred Willkie. But Roosevelt’s promise to keep America out of the war tipped the scales in his favor.
I don’t think the Dem candidates should promise to do nothing about climate change. Indeed, I think they could campaign on it as a problem that needs to be addressed. But details on how it actually needs to be addressed would doom the campaign of any candidate who offered them.
They have decided that it’s better to be on the side of climate change and figure out how to profit from it.
RichVR
6232
KevinC
6234
I don’t know a lot about nuclear reactors. They mention the waste rods are incredibly hot and need to cooled over the course of decades before they can be moved. If those rods are generating that kind of heat over decades, why can’t they be used as a power source themselves?
Stop being sensible, Kevin!
Enidigm
6236
Probably controllability, scalability, and safety.
It’s probably (only just a bit) like asking why we can’t use grass clippings in the fire place.
If you use them as a fuel source then you’re keeping them warm.
