69
Head of Nuke Abolition Group Decries Gaza Suffering After Winning Nobel Peace Prize
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
69 points (100.0% liked)
Palestine
989 readers
86 users here now
A community for everything related to Palestine and the occupation currently underway by the occupying force known as Israel.
Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism. Existence is resistance for Palestinians.
Please refer to Israel as Occupied Palestine, or occupied territories. The IDF is a fascist and ethnonationalist occupying force. Israelis are settlers. We understand however that the imperial narrative (which tries to legitimise Israel) is internalised in the imperial core and slip-ups are naturally expected.
We always take the sides of Palestine and Palestinians and are unapologetic about it. Israel is an occupying power whose "defence force"'s (note the contradiction) sole purpose for existing is to push Palestinians out so they can resettle their rightful land. If you have anything positive to say about Israel we do not care.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I hope I don't get in trouble for this, being newly allowed to join this instance but I feel compelled to say I'd like to see a move away from DU and even nuclear power. Even exposure to low levels of uranium causes serious health issues, at every link in the supply chain.
It's also heavily on my mind as well that MAD isn't any sort of deterrent and it's mind-boggling how sociopathic the human species have largely become. And how can we ensure the whole world gets on board and complies?
Yes and also, nuclear power is really expensive. No one would ever invest in it without state help. No one insures it. The cost per watt is way to high and set to rise further with depleting uranium deposits. And much much higher, if it was mined in a slightly less destructive and exploitive way. Higher still if security precautions were forced to be up to date. Incredibly high, if waste was properly taken care of and the costs included in the calculation.
Nuclear power was never profitable. The only reason it ever gets founded is because governments are motivated by the urge to amass more and more deadly nuclear weapons. Or keep that option open. Or to feed the industrial complex that grew around that.
It's the most roundaboud, stupid and primitive way to go about creating electricity to collect rare ultra poisonous, slightly warm rocks, throw enough of them into water until it boils and push that through something similar to a steam engine. All the technology around it is just to keep the rocks from poisoning us too quickly.
Compare that to all the genuine novel research that goes into solar and batteries. The advanced materials like complex semi conductor alloys. The clever techniques using the latest in quantum and nano technology. How they squeeze every bit of efficiency out of remotely collecting energy from the nuclear fusion in the sun, that's already going on for free and at a save distance.
Nuclear energy on earth is superfluous, dangerous and expensive and every month new advancements are made in solar and battery and other genuinely green technologies, that make them even better and cheaper and widen the gap even more. And of course China is investing heavily in both solar and battery research.
My dear friend, are you suggesting we masses have been sold lies?! Can you point me in the direction of more information, please?
The knee jerk cynic in me would be inclined to agree, but I'm very ignorant of the facts.
Digging up elements in general has problems. I'm ok with less problematic solutions but don't want to delude myself that it's more humane, and identifying problems can help us correct. I'm not knocking your solution, either. It feels more correct (yep, vibes, I really need more quality information. That's why I'm here).
I'm very interested in Chinese innovation, strengths, weaknesses and risks. It speaks for itself that my government is quick to dismiss, demonize and try to isolate China. It makes me more curious. After all, in the old fables, the serpent told the material truth. I'm getting too big for my britches here, let me leave well enough alone until I'm more informed.
The weapons need to go first without question. But I think that the power stuff might realistically be needed badly for us to put as much of a dent as possible into getting fossil fuels out of use on the grids. There are less problematic options that are around (Thorium is the one I have seen), and of course China is doing some major progress towards fusion which would be massively game changing. This isn't to say that we shouldn't use renewable options like geothermal, wind, tidal, etc..
But I think the threat of MAD is that main thing that needs to be stopped. The threat of MAD is not effective if a armed nation refuses to take an L if they fuck around and find themselves losing land fast. Israel is currently the big threat for actually using a nuke as they would rather take everyone out as they find out that their military isn't as good as they claim. They are starting wars on multiple fronts and are not a large (fake) nation. They are also ran by a very similar death cult of hawks that the US has had over various periods (so many mf-ers were wanting to use shit the moment a leftist party gained support anywhere).
Sadly I don't know how we could actually remove all weapons. As all of the current holders would most certainly keep some hidden. And they would say that it was "needed" because "what if the others don't actually do it???" headspace.
A brief glance through search results did show thorium as less problematic, but not without a significant amount of concern; oxidation being the most immediately notable. I'd prefer to look at other options and get busy with them. I'll try to look more into it in the coming weeks at my leisure. Do you have any links on fusion (not YouTube, I'm sulking over their shenanigans, yes I'm being petulant)? I'm sure I should be terrified, but for some reason, this feels (yes, vibes ok?) more exciting, more promising-- but perhaps I'm over-romanticizing the potentiality and probably seriously minimizing the risks. I just don't see anything about it in my usual media sources.
Israel is a problem, and their shenanigans at the behest of and in conjunction with my own nation (USA) has my intimate apparel in as many twists and knots as the fabric can accommodate. And I don't know what can be done about them, without the United States getting on board, and we all see how that is going. And the USA is the only state known to have ever used the bomb, which imo, makes us the problem, because without us in the mix, Israel would have been solved shortly after the Six Days war, in my estimation. I'm rambling and talking in circles, please suffice it to say, I see no clear solution, if the rest of the Western world doesn't draw a solid line with the USA and Israel and to the devil with the economics of it. Perhaps it could be suggested that military personnel and ambassadors have over-stayed their welcome. I can't begin to imagine the ramifications.
BRICS is an interesting and brilliant move, afaict. Moody already downgraded US credit before. If creditors were to begin demanding more than just servicing payments and later doing $n amount of forgiveness in exchange for major policy changes, that would be interesting. The forgiveness amount would have to be significant enough to entice the US, without giving them back too much financial leverage, because facing facts, money is power, and that's all governments care about in the end. I don't imagine any of them care very much about us regular people, outside what emotional appeals they can use to induce us to continue being their pawns, and those held up as national heros may be knights and rooks on the global board, but will never be the kings and queens. I slept on this reply and woke up still cynical.
There may occasionally be great leaders who actually do care, but we see how they've been neutralized. I personally probably over-romanticize Che Guevara, and remember how he's demonized for example, shooting caught deserters on the spot. In cold, harsh reality, passions aside, it was war and how are guerilla forces to "more humanely" deal with such issues? It was practical and expedient, so too for the Jacobins, but I digress significantly, but will add one of the bravest things I can remember uttered is to the effect of, "Shoot, it is only a man you kill." I don't know whether he felt fear in that moment, and it's not the point. He didn't beg like a dog for a wretched life. It's easy to be dispassionate so far away in time and proximity, you know?
Of course they would. One country we absolutely know has nukes, and never admitted it. People were executed for saying so. And that may be the best argument for avoiding fission power and some international agency that is truly more inclusively global could be designed for inspection. I don't have any idea. I'm pretty ignorant and spitballing, trying to imagine a reality outside the lines drawn. I'm open to criticisms and suggestions. I'm not a young woman with an immigration as versatile as I'd prefer.
As well as a huge amount of chemicals that are refined and used in industry on a daily basis. Still, I understand the concern: I am completely against the use of nuclear energy in capitalism, as well as the chemical industry in general. Not only are safety standards poor, especially in third world countries, but it is also common for companies to disregard standards if they get in the way of making a quick profit. For these things to work, in a future socialist society, we need very good standards and oversight: I don't want to repeat Chernobyl.
It's not that "largely": the vast majority of humanity has no agency whatsoever in this madness, since this is done precisely to try to control us.
We don't. The only way we can safely abandon weapons of mass destruction is when imperialism is completely extinct. Until then, the fact that both sides have WMDs has prevented them from being used (for now).
From what little I've read, lithium mining isn't great, either, but I'm pretty vague in my limited understanding, so that's just an aside. A pretty significant one considering transportation and logistics, but I'm not informed enough to speak much about it, and haven't been made aware of other options. If you know of any, please pass them my way.
Well, it's learned and seems contagious. It's so odd to me how people on the lower layers of the capitalist pyramid so easily begrudge those who have even less, but when shown articles about E**n making approximately $656/second, the typical reply isn't, "why should anyone make that absurd amount when neither themselves, all their children and children's mother's couldn't possibly spend it all in a hundred generations, when it could easily be more equitably distributed and no one need be hungry, homeless, or dying from easily treatable or easily healed diseases?" and is usually met with, "wish I made that much, my taxes support the rich and poor alike (which is problematic far beyond the psychological implications)." The only way I can explain it is that we struggle so hard for the crumbs, and been beaten physically and mentally into submission so often, it never occurs to us to come together and take from the scraps, let alone the table, of the master who keeps us around solely because he perceives there may be more value which he can wring from us, rather than fighting our economic equals or those still less privileged than ourselves. All this to say, serious reimagined, reworked and lengthy reeducation (and my understanding of that is admittedly seriously lacking and heavily informed by Western-centric narrative, so any educational material not on YouTube will be also greatly appreciated).
Do we have time to accomplish that? I'm willing to do what I can anyway, but my resources and ability are quickly diminishing, as are my years, barring some wild fluke.
I don't know, but is our only chance. Revolution or Barbarism, or even extinction.
I'm inclined to agreement. I'm also not comfortable with terms like "barbarism," and "savage" after having seen a cooking show doco, of all things. I don't know what better terms to suggest. Cruel, bloodlust seem to fall short. I'm not faulting you, because I use those terms; it's just recently come to my awareness, and I usually don't say anything. I would just feel more comfortable raising the topic here, among those who would be less inclined to reactionary response.
I am paraphrasing a phrase that was attributed to Engels: "Socialism or Barbarism". I do not think there is a problem in using barbarism for the likely return to tribalism in the case of capitalism falls for itself, it has a problematic etymology, (like vandalism, for example) and it was widely used in a racist way, but I do not believe that using it, with the meaning defined in Origin of the Family, has any impact on the permanence or absence of racism.
I understand. I'm not faulting you. It was just brought to my consciousness in the last month of two. I didn't have a word to suggest, other than vile, heinous, abhorrent, etc but they fall short.
Grid level solar, off shore wind, and on shore wind are cheaper than gas, coal, and nuclear. Grid level battery storage is starting to become feasible on a mass scale. Additionally, battery tech is becoming safer and less polluting over time as newer tech that is safe and relies less on precious metals become commercialized.
More so than the energy generation, mining of nuclear materials can create serious health effects similar to the ones downwinders in Utah and Nevada suffered from atomic testing. (see Black Hills Uranium mining tailings) In addition to nuclear waste from nuclear power, coal fired plants also tend to emit nuclear particles as well which can contaminate ground and water nearby.
We absolutely have the technological ability to move on from all of this, we just have a government that isn't interested in doing anything because investing in infrastructure doesn't bring in campaign donations the same way extending the lifespan of existing nuclear and coal powered plants do.
If we have nuclear winter, would anyone survive to have to sort other options?
Beats me, I'm not a nuclear expert, I'm just a fan of moving to actual carbon neutral/negative generation (and, maybe, while we're at it, the disposession of capital, as a little treat 👉👈)
I recall Yogthos having recently posted an article about it. If there are survivors, I may pity them more than the dead.