Meritocracy of Serving Capital

I sometimes feel like I'm taking crazy pills with this whole climate change thing. We are sleep walking into extinction, and there is a large portion of people actively fighting to let it happen.
- I mean at one point, even sane people just give up. I was also worrying a lot, then I accepted that the emissions will keep rising for reasons outside of my personal control. That doesn’t mean I start to eat with plastic cutlery at home, and drive a V8 Ford truck to work, but I’m also not going to stop it, unless I go Luigi on oil executives (and even that might be not enough).
  Climate change is happening, it will suck (it already does), and humanity will need to adapt to it.
  
  That's true, but we don't have to sleep walking into it. We can fight it, and we can mitigate. I would rather mitigate than adapt. Adaptation is not only expensive (cuz some people only understand dollar signs), but it will also kill a fuck ton of people, and a lot of species on earth. I have to tune this shit lut regularly and pretend it isn't happening or I'll have a mental break down.
- Don't look up.
- Yeah, but you have to see it from their point of view.
  They're getting obscenely wealthy while it's happening.
- I want humanity to end for the good of the planet. Others don't care if humanity ends as long as they live a good life. We are not the same
  
  Yeah, well, there's multiple perspectives to the climate crisis. You either love humanity enough to want to see us grow as a species or you don't. If you dont, then sit the fuck down and get out of the way.
  
  The problem is we're going to kill a hell of a lot of innocent animals before we start making any impact on the people causing the most of it.
  
  Then you support Wyoming's "CO2 is awesome" bill, because at least the plants will thrive after humanity?
  
  My suggestion to you is the same as to everyone else who wants humanity end, start with yourself, lead by example, or shut the fuck up.

I didn't know anyone thought our civilization was organized around science?
I never heard of that.
- Fewer and fewer think it is "organized".
- Right? Advances were made because it made someone money and/or gave them power. There were and probably plenty of formulae or discoveries that languish in dusty storage that nobody will care about unless they’re suddenly found to have an application that grants someone money or power. These giant atom smashers are hard to funs because, again, there’s no money in it. Tokamak and other fusion reactors have a hope of profit, so they get funding. Basic sciences all struggle for funding.

Getting past the Great Filter seems to require a species that is hive minded and with generational memory. Both that are lacking for us outside of that invention of communication that can be overwhelmed by self interest.

Plus, most people are only interested in 'science' if it's big, showy or has interesting results. They aren't interested in the day to day monotony of science, null results etc even though that is equally as interesting ioo.
Mostly people are interested in what might benefit their lives. Not the thousands of hours it took to get there.
- I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Would you mind explaining more?
  True.
- Mostly people are interested in what might benefit their lives. Not the thousands of hours it took to get there.
  Nor in anything that might benefit the lives of people they see themselves completely detached from or even superior to, even if in reality they are either much more alike than they ever would or could admit, and or could end up in the other person's shoes in a heartbeat.

Damn you Jason for spitting facts.

I thought most science was organized around murdering people. War efforts and such.
- incorrect. science is a method to measure reality and come to conclusions based on fact. it has no bias.
  
  I was being smarmy. Science attracts funding and public interest when it's used to manufacture war materials (munitions, guidance, etc.)

Jason Hickle, not to be confused with Jackson Hinkle, the far-right "MAGA Communist."
- "Jackson" but I thought the same.
  
  Oof, thanks for the correction! But yea I mix em up all the time lmao

Capital is a red herring. The problem is egoism and closely related tribalism. Those will never be solved as long as life exists.
For example, hippies who claim to be anti-capitalist will ignore those parts of science they don't like e.g modern medicine, but will use biology, chemistry, physics, social studies and many other studies example to underpin their reasoning.
- This is why in the immediate wake of great disasters—a flood, a blackout, a revolution or economic collapse—people tend to behave the same way, reverting to a kind of rough-and-ready communism. Hierarchies, markets and the like become luxuries that no one can really afford them. Anyone who has lived through such a moment can speak to the way strangers become sisters and brothers, and human society itself seems to be reborn. We are not just talking about cooperation.
  Communism is the foundation of all human sociability. It makes society possible. On the Moral Grounds of Economic Relations
- Capital isn't a Red Herring, though, it's the basis of Capitalist production and is what drives further and further exploitation, especially along international and class-based lines. "Egoism* and "tribalism" are just the cultural aspects of such a mode of production being expressed in such a manner.