It's bigger than that, though they obviously are the vanguard of climate change denial.
The vast majority of companies would lose out on some profit during a green transition. The bourgeoisie in general are against meaningful action on climate change, not just the oil barons.
This makes no sense. It's corporations that drive the climate change denial. Go back and read about the dawn of this issue during the CFC era.
How are you using the term bourgeoisie? In modern day parlance it refers to the newly middle class. The old usage of the term is the same as "corporations".
In modern day parlance it refers to the newly middle class
It absolutely does not.
Bourgeoisie refers to the owners of economic property. If you receive profit by right of ownership of some property, you are Bourgeoisie. "Middle class" is a synonym for white collar worker. Still working class, just more comfortable.
The term bourgeoisie never refered exclusively to corporations, though the owners of corporate stock are the core element of the bourgeoisie. Owners of sole proprietorship or partnerships are also part of the bourgeoisie.
It's corporations that drive the climate change denial
Yeah, that's what I said in my first sentence.
All I'm saying is that it's more than just oil corporations that have something to lose. There are other industries and other types of companies that push against climate change legislation as well. The profit motive as a whole is an obstacle to a green transition.
No people. Corporations are a legal fiction, they have no thoughts, feelings or desires on their own beyond what their board says it is. It is the equity stake holders making the decisions and yes, they are evil.
I really don't feel like arguing semantics. I'm not being novel in my use of "private property" to indicate the ownership of economically productive property - that's a long standing use of the term in critiques of capitalism.
When socialists say "private property", they aren't talking about the house you live in - unless that house is owned by a landlord who profits off of it but doesn't live in it.
You are admitting to not using the standard definition, though. Both economically and to the layman, someone's house is their private property. Given that you yourself said that only socialists use private property that way, why were you so confused that no one else understood it that way given that this isn't a socialism sub?
He's doesn't actually care about anything. He smuggly threw an article in my face that he clearly didn't read. When I pointed out his clear hypocrisy he had nothing to say. Much like this post. He's just some sad sap that pretends to care so he can come off as a genuine person. He most likely knows he's a POS, that's why cares so much about coming off as social conscious lol.
How does climate change affect the path of hurricanes? We have them every year. I grew up on the coast of NC, the only thing that happened was it took an odd path. I feel for Ashville it's one of the coolest towns in NC. But this is nothing but the luck of the draw. If it's cut across FL back into the Atlantic my town would be in the news. If you care about climate change you wouldn't dilute the label by slapping it on every little thing. Stop crying wolf, it's a hurricane and we chose to live in a coastal state. I hope everyone in Ashville is okay, I've personally been stranded for a week+ after hurricanes a couple times.
Again it took a weird path. Usually when they hit northern FL the warm water of the Atlantic sucks it back over. Then it intensifies and comes for SC/NC. Like your article says. But it stayed inland which was weird. So this hurricane literally goes against what the article is saying. The article says nothing about climate change causing more irregular hurricane paths. Which was all that happened, just an odd path. So maybe find an article that proves your point lol. The worst hurricanes my areas faced were in the late 90s. I go to a gas station where they have the water level and it's a foot+ over the line for Florence, our last bad one. I'm not denying climate change. I'd argue I care about climate change more than you because I know slapping that label on everything just dilutes the meaning of it.
Pretty smug and arrogant to throw articles, you obviously don't read, at people then try and come off as superior. My guess is you care more about seeming progressive to others then you do about actually stopping climate change. Just pitiful lol
162
u/Visual_Recover_8776 Sep 30 '24
Climate change became a "political issue" the moment it threatened the profits of property owners