I've been noticing this more and more, there's an insistence that pointed economic or environmental criticisms of some consumption habit, usually almost exclusively partaken by the upper middle class and wealthier people, must actually secretly be a purely cultural critique. I'm sure these guys work for Exxon or some shit, lmao.
Leigh is correct here: The only goal for stopping climate change is to reduce c02 emissions and decarbonise all industry and transport, regardless as to how you feel about the industries themselves, be it cruise ships or otherwise.
To say that Leigh Phillips works for Exxon is preposterous.
He has authored probably one of the best books on modern ecology ever written, not to mention co-authored a book entirely dedicated to showing the superiority of economic planning and arguing for the all-out nationalisation of major corporations (ie: commanding heights of the ecomony).
Leigh is a dyed-in-the-wool socialist, and he is right.
the idea that you can decarbonize everything, including cruise ships, seem rather far fetched but i dunno
deleted by creator
It's completely doable. The technology for it already exists, it just needs government support (and state planning) to be implemented, not to mention for the iron grip of the fossil fuel companies to be liquefied.
Cruise ships, shipping and aviation for example could all be retrofitted to use carbon-neutral synthetic hydrocarbon fuel or hydrogen fuel cell tech instead of oil or LNG.
Naturally, this would require an absolutely massive expansion of carbon free electricity, and really the only way that you can do it at scale is through nuclear and/or hydroelectricity power.
ngl kinda skeptical. the reason cruises are cheap in the first place is massive subsidies, tax evasion and regulation skippin on the high seas. just substituting for hydrogen doesn't make up for that, surely. plus, what hydrogen even since much of what we have is 'hydrogen, clean, sort of'.
i dunno i'm seeing a future where tourism is much more local
deleted by creator
He's critical of both the USSR and China, yes.
He has described his position as "Neither Bejing nor Bezos" (sort of like the nonaligned nations slogan of "neither Washington nor Moscow" back in the day)
Leigh is a bit of a free-speech fundamentalist, for lack of a better term, and I have mixed feelings on that (he gives very good reasons, but I also have my qualms).
In any event, insofar as his views on ecology, modernity, state planning, and democracy are concerned I think he's highly underrated as a political thinker on the left.
deleted by creator
People take third-campists much more seriously than pro-Beijing socialists.
deleted by creator
Right, sorry, I meant American workers. I'm being America-centric again. In the work I do, we frame things in terms of "opposing US meddling" as opposed to "supporting the communists" because it tends to go over better with the semi-radicalized people we rely on while mobilizing.
deleted by creator
By third campist, I thought you meant neither-washington-nor-moscow, style politics, not Trotskyism.