The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:37 am

The world is overpopulated, humans are doing untold damage to the earth just by existing, our insatiable appetite for more and more stuff, all the time is leading to incredible ecological harm, pollution, and extinction, and moreover there doesn't really seem to be much of an idea what to do about it. I could list here a very wide array of ways in which humans are destroying the earth, from global warming to plastic pollution to Chinese traditional "medicine" to rainforest destruction to ocean acidification to overuse of concrete and now even to SpaceX ruining the night sky just so we can have some internet. Moving to electric cars as a species means we use up precious metals, and we're really not that good at recycling them.

Lets be honest, much of the drive for this is capitalism. It has given us untold freedom in our communities, but it - at least in its current incarnation - requires growth to be maintained over time, so that means more consumption, more people, more damage.

Is there any way at all that we can come through the next century with the world not being dead? How would capitalism need to change (or should it be discarded in favour of something else)? How does capitalism changing affect human rights? Do we need a worldwide one-child policy, for instance? Restrictions on consumption, or stronger incentives against it?
If truth is many-sided, mendacity is many-tongued

User avatar
bjn
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2916
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:58 pm
Location: London

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by bjn » Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:47 am

An argument could be made that capitalism could fix some of those problems if externalities could be priced in. So making polluters pay a realistic price for all the downsides of their actions. The problem with this is that you don’t necessarily know what all the downsides are until it’s way too late. The other problem is that the people making money are not passive actors taking such regulation on the chin. For example, a decent price on carbon emission is an existential threat to fossil fuel companies. They are fighting such actions tooth and nail, so making money at a significant cost to everyone else.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:02 am

How would capitalism need to change (or should it be discarded in favour of something else)? How does capitalism changing affect human rights? Do we need a worldwide one-child policy, for instance? Restrictions on consumption, or stronger incentives against it?
Apologies for being depressing. But IMHO its very difficult for me to see a way to enforce radical cuts in consumption in developed countries and maintain respect for basic principles of democracy and human rights.

Yes, some people may voluntarily reduce consumption some of the time. But the only way that the majority will vote for a radical cut in consumption (eg eat meat once a month) is if it is faced with an immediate threat (eg of invasion).

The problem is twofold. Firstly, people in developed countries are lucky. The worst impacts on food production will felt be elsewhere (eg for Europe and North America, droughts in southerly latitudes will probably be offset by increased production further north). The population of Dhaka will be flooded out long before the population of London.

Secondly, rich people, and in global terms that means the populations of Western Europe and North America, are also able to insulate themselves from the worst effects of global warming. They can afford to outbid others for food, or to build higher flood defences or move inland.

Time and time again, people have shown that they'll vote for short term consumption instead of, say, greater security for future generations. They'll vote for which ever option allows them to consume more next year.

This isn't an argument for autocracy. Sooner or later that would result in rebellion and war.

There might be a way forward through improving technology and cutting emissions without reducing consumption.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:10 am

That's a good explanation of my own very nebulous sense of the whole thing. Which, in turn, means that it's also about democracy and whether that can also survive if the planet will avoid disaster.

Are we getting to an age of a battle between capitalism & democracy versus the environment?
If truth is many-sided, mendacity is many-tongued

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:23 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:10 am
That's a good explanation of my own very nebulous sense of the whole thing. Which, in turn, means that it's also about democracy and whether that can also survive if the planet will avoid disaster.

Are we getting to an age of a battle between capitalism & democracy versus the environment?
The problem is that non-democratic forms of government tend to be unstable. An autocracy run by environmentalists probably wouldn't last very long. I don't think its a viable option for trying to solve a long term problem. So we are stuck with making democracy work.

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by username » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:28 am

Are the problems you highlight caused by capitalism, or is it humans wishing for more comfortable, easier existence?
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:35 am

Well, capitalism is inherently bound up in that. The two are inextricably linked. They both drive and feed each other. It's hard to walk into, say, any toy shop and feel that as people we're really doing our best to minimise our impact on the earth.

But we can't fix the desire, can we? We can fix our economic models though, potentially. Especially ones which have classically ignored the concept that, actually, resources might be limited. But fixing them is then itself bound up with a host of other problems. Hence the thread.
If truth is many-sided, mendacity is many-tongued

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by secret squirrel » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:45 am

username wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:28 am
Are the problems you highlight caused by capitalism, or is it humans wishing for more comfortable, easier existence?
It's obviously not just about humans wanting easier lives, because there's a huge industry devoted to making people want to consume more. What we have is not the product of rational agents with perfect information making choices.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:30 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:35 am
Well, capitalism is inherently bound up in that. The two are inextricably linked. They both drive and feed each other. It's hard to walk into, say, any toy shop and feel that as people we're really doing our best to minimise our impact on the earth.

But we can't fix the desire, can we? We can fix our economic models though, potentially. Especially ones which have classically ignored the concept that, actually, resources might be limited. But fixing them is then itself bound up with a host of other problems. Hence the thread.
If we are talking about solutions, it’s probably impossible to eliminate desire. But it can be redirected.

For example, lots of consumption is about social status. The new car isn’t just about comfort or safety. Often its also about showing off the owner’s wealth. I expect that we are stuck with people being motivated by status. But the things they use to show it off can be changed. It might be possible for people to display their wealth in ways that don’t involve new machinery or long haul flights.

User avatar
mediocrity511
Snowbonk
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by mediocrity511 » Sat Nov 23, 2019 12:53 pm

I feel that a lot of consumption is tied up with lack of time. When everyone is pushed for time, then they want to get there as fast as possible, so drive instead of walk or cycle. You end up buying ready meals and processed foods, you buy new things because second hand is less convenient and can be harder to get exactly what you want. You tumble dry your clothes because it is way faster than line drying and doesnt depend on the weather etc. etc. People would be a lot more willing to embrace a lower impact way of living if they were given time in exchange.

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by username » Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:40 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:35 am
Well, capitalism is inherently bound up in that. The two are inextricably linked. They both drive and feed each other. It's hard to walk into, say, any toy shop and feel that as people we're really doing our best to minimise our impact on the earth.

But we can't fix the desire, can we? We can fix our economic models though, potentially. Especially ones which have classically ignored the concept that, actually, resources might be limited. But fixing them is then itself bound up with a host of other problems. Hence the thread.
At the risk of being annoying and answering a question with a question, is capitalism inextricably bound up in that as a causative thing, or is it any kind of large scale social cohesion we've attempted to date? Other civilisations which predate capitalism (and any semblance of modern democracy for that matter) have failed having overexploited and poorly distributed resources.

Capitalism might just be the label we give to the operating system, but other tried economic modalities might not have been better; I'm not saying things can't be improved, just I am not certain the problems of overexploitation and inefficient distribution flow inextricably from capitalism; they could perhaps be ameliorated with the right externality controls as bjn suggests.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by username » Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:58 pm

There's a side discussion to be had wrt overpopulation. There have been big shifts in fertility from traditional numbers to that seen currently in oecd nations. Many developing countries are also trending in the 'right' direction via a vis reducing fertility, so it's by no means certain any kind of one child type policy would need be imposed (and let's face it, the imposition would not likely be on Western countries who already have population growth largely controlled). There's also the random pandemic correction which some pessimists assure me is just around the next flu season corner :)
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 23, 2019 3:13 pm

mediocrity511 wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 12:53 pm
I feel that a lot of consumption is tied up with lack of time. When everyone is pushed for time, then they want to get there as fast as possible, so drive instead of walk or cycle. You end up buying ready meals and processed foods, you buy new things because second hand is less convenient and can be harder to get exactly what you want. You tumble dry your clothes because it is way faster than line drying and doesnt depend on the weather etc. etc. People would be a lot more willing to embrace a lower impact way of living if they were given time in exchange.
Definitely. Though in general they are often reluctant to swap more time for a lower income (though of course there are exceptions).

User avatar
rockdoctor
Clardic Fug
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 11:52 am
Location: Paddington, London

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by rockdoctor » Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:20 pm

If everything is about getting more sex, maybe sexbots will save us

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by username » Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:29 pm

I suspect it's easy to overlook the physical rigours that some types activities are being labelled as consumption there.

There is a physical demand on walking or biking, even in the most clement weather. Cooking, though pleasant for many, is not something everyone is very good at and, like almost anything, becomes less of an enjoyable pastime when it shifts from a want to to a have to. Swapping time for less money is not especially attractive if one knows that the extra time is likely to be consumed by chores.

Eta; Wasn't there a program on the box where a family lived as Victorians (?maybe) for a while to experience life at a different time. Anyone remember it?
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

User avatar
mediocrity511
Snowbonk
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by mediocrity511 » Sat Nov 23, 2019 6:34 pm

username wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:29 pm
I suspect it's easy to overlook the physical rigours that some types activities are being labelled as consumption there.

There is a physical demand on walking or biking, even in the most clement weather. Cooking, though pleasant for many, is not something everyone is very good at and, like almost anything, becomes less of an enjoyable pastime when it shifts from a want to to a have to. Swapping time for less money is not especially attractive if one knows that the extra time is likely to be consumed by chores.

Eta; Wasn't there a program on the box where a family lived as Victorians (?maybe) for a while to experience life at a different time. Anyone remember it?

There's been a few, "back in time for dinner/tea/school etc".

And yes, if all the time was consumed by chores it wouldn't be a good trade off, but if people had increased leisure time as well then it would be more palatable.

User avatar
science_fox
Snowbonk
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:34 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by science_fox » Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:28 pm

mediocrity511 wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 6:34 pm
username wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:29 pm
I suspect it's easy to overlook the physical rigours that some types activities are being labelled as consumption there.

There is a physical demand on walking or biking, even in the most clement weather. Cooking, though pleasant for many, is not something everyone is very good at and, like almost anything, becomes less of an enjoyable pastime when it shifts from a want to to a have to. Swapping time for less money is not especially attractive if one knows that the extra time is likely to be consumed by chores.

Eta; Wasn't there a program on the box where a family lived as Victorians (?maybe) for a while to experience life at a different time. Anyone remember it?

There's been a few, "back in time for dinner/tea/school etc".

And yes, if all the time was consumed by chores it wouldn't be a good trade off, but if people had increased leisure time as well then it would be more palatable.
I believe studies have shown that the time allocated to housework has barely changed at all over the last several decades, despite all the (environment destroying) technical advantages.
I'm not afraid of catching Covid, I'm afraid of catching idiot.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:57 pm

It depends upon what you mean by several decades. Four decades brings us back to the end of the 70s and the amount of time spent on domestic labour probably hasn’t changed very much since then.

By then the major labor saving innovations were widespread - eg fridges and freezers, vacuum cleaners or hoovers, mains water, electric or gas heating and cookers, electric lighting, washing machines (at home or in a launderette).

Go back to the 40s and people spent far more time on domestic labour as they had to rely upon fires for heating, wash clothes by hand, and go shopping every day because they couldn’t store perishable food at home.

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by discovolante » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:17 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:57 pm
It depends upon what you mean by several decades. Four decades brings us back to the end of the 70s and the amount of time spent on domestic labour probably hasn’t changed very much since then.

By then the major labor saving innovations were widespread - eg fridges and freezers, vacuum cleaners or hoovers, mains water, electric or gas heating and cookers, electric lighting, washing machines (at home or in a launderette).

Go back to the 40s and people spent far more time on domestic labour as they had to rely upon fires for heating, wash clothes by hand, and go shopping every day because they couldn’t store perishable food at home.
[oversimplification]
'Hey ladies, we invented some machines to do housework so you don't have to! So much free time!'

...

'Guess what, now you have all that free time you can go to work and be independent! Forge your own career!'

...

'Haha, so you and your husband are both at work now, which means we're doubling the price of your washing machine! Have fun in the office! Oh and do the housework when you get back too.'[/oversimplification]
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

User avatar
username
Clardic Fug
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:51 pm
Location: The Good Place

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by username » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:38 pm

science_fox wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:28 pm
mediocrity511 wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 6:34 pm
username wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:29 pm
I suspect it's easy to overlook the physical rigours that some types activities are being labelled as consumption there.

There is a physical demand on walking or biking, even in the most clement weather. Cooking, though pleasant for many, is not something everyone is very good at and, like almost anything, becomes less of an enjoyable pastime when it shifts from a want to to a have to. Swapping time for less money is not especially attractive if one knows that the extra time is likely to be consumed by chores.

Eta; Wasn't there a program on the box where a family lived as Victorians (?maybe) for a while to experience life at a different time. Anyone remember it?

There's been a few, "back in time for dinner/tea/school etc".

And yes, if all the time was consumed by chores it wouldn't be a good trade off, but if people had increased leisure time as well then it would be more palatable.
I believe studies have shown that the time allocated to housework has barely changed at all over the last several decades, despite all the (environment destroying) technical advantages.
I think studies have shown the amount of time spent doing housework has more than halved since the 1960s. What has been slower to change is the proportion of time spent doing housework in the home by men &women.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.

User avatar
bolo
Dorkwood
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:17 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by bolo » Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:44 pm

discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:17 pm
we're doubling the price of your washing machine!
I don't really believe this bit, unless you're not adjusting washing machine prices for overall inflation.

Here, for example, is a 1962 washing machine for $184.95, which is the equivalent of more than $1500 in today's money. As it happens, my washing machine just broke, and I'll be having a new one delivered on Monday for about half that. Not to mention it will be a lot more energy and water efficient than the 1962 one, with more settings and features.

User avatar
Gfamily
Light of Blast
Posts: 5180
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Gfamily » Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:51 pm

bolo wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:44 pm
Not to mention it will be a lot more energy and water efficient than the 1962 one, with more settings and features.
Of which you will most likely use no more that three in a year*

* if you're anything like us anyway.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

User avatar
bolo
Dorkwood
Posts: 1016
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:17 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by bolo » Sun Nov 24, 2019 12:13 am

Gfamily wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:51 pm
bolo wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:44 pm
Not to mention it will be a lot more energy and water efficient than the 1962 one, with more settings and features.
Of which you will most likely use no more that three in a year*

* if you're anything like us anyway.
Possibly true, but even three is one more than the 1962 machine had :-)

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:25 am

Here’s some data.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... 2016-11-10

Unsurprisingly women are doing a lot more unpaid domestic labour than men (in every area but transport).

Also, as has been pointed out, people on low incomes are doing more than people on high incomes. Presumably the latter can afford to pay other people to do more of it (eg ready meals or eating out) or buy more machines (eg a roomba).

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The future of the environment, capitalism & human rights

Post by Woodchopper » Sun Nov 24, 2019 11:04 am

Woodchopper wrote:
Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:25 am
Here’s some data.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... 2016-11-10

Unsurprisingly women are doing a lot more unpaid domestic labour than men (in every area but transport).

Also, as has been pointed out, people on low incomes are doing more than people on high incomes. Presumably the latter can afford to pay other people to do more of it (eg ready meals or eating out) or buy more machines (eg a roomba).
Some historical numbers

UK
Minutes spent doing housework per week
Female/Male

1975: 206 55
1983: 194 76
1987: 164 85
1997: 160 78
2000: 165 83

Source: https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/file ... df#page=37

These numbers aren't necessarily comparable with the data in the above post, as they may have used different definitions etc.

It looks like total time has decreased a little, from 261 minutes in 1975 to 248 minutes in 2000. But as mentioned above, improvements in technology were mostly in place by the late 70s.

Post Reply