That's not Fox, the TV news network, but filmmaker Josh Fox. He and a lot of other prominent climate activists have responded to the documentary film "Planet of the Humans", produced and presented by filmmaker Michael Moore. I posted an article about that documentary a few days ago and said it was already controversial and that there's a lot left open for debate; today I therefore present the arguments of the "other" side.
source: Wikipedia
I used quotes around "other" in the introduction because ultimately I believe we're all on the same side; we're all aware of the fact that climate change is real, that humanity has a large negative influence on that climate change, and that something needs to be done about it sooner rather than later. Moore argues in "Planet of the Humans" that the current methods of generating renewable energy are not enough or outright ineffective, and ultimately concludes that the only way to really solve this problem is to cut down on consumption. That's a very brief summary, so read the post here, and watch the documentary that's linked in that post if you wish.
I don't know enough about all the technical and scientific aspects involved in the renewable energy technologies to give a meaningful opinion on that, but I do like the intended goal, as given by the filmmakers and executive producer, behind the documentary; start a discussion within the circle of climate activists about how to go forward as we've been losing the fight against climate change these past decades. I also fully agree with the film's conclusion that a large part of any real solution should be a reversal or change in the way capitalism demands growth in consumption. But the film also has a Malthusian undertone to it, which I criticized in my post from a few days ago, and which is also the main reason why climate activists have responded negatively to the documentary. Another big reason for this negative response is about the technology; Josh Fox claims that the filmmakers use outdated information and that current technologies can provide 100% carbon-neutral solutions. That's something I can't comment on though due to a severe lack in knowledge...
So please watch this 10 minute interview with Josh Fox to be fully informed about both sides in this ongoing discussion. One thing here gives me hope though; Fox, toward the end of the interview, indicates that he agrees with the film's conclusion that "runaway capitalism" is incompatible with real solutions to climate change caused by humans, and that "The Green New Deal" is indeed an FDR-like program controlled by the government, which means it's non-profit and therefore not part of the perpetual-growth-economy. They agree on the important part in my opinion. The only problem is that the rest of the economy is still capitalist and still depending on growth, and that producing ever more goods automatically means using ever more energy to produce those goods, goods that also pollute the environment... Like I said: this is a touchy and complicated subject, but one that's important enough to be informed about as much as we can. So please listen to Fox's arguments here:
Filmmaker Josh Fox responds to Michael Moore on bombshell climate film
Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, keep safe, keep healthy!
Recent articles you might be interested in:
| Latest article >>>>>>>>>>> | Short-Sighted Society |
|---|---|
| Howard Beale's Epic Rant | The Green New Scam? |
| Corona Panopticon | The Summer Releases And Dune |
| Larry's Authoritarians | Angry Comedian |
Thanks for stopping by and reading. If you really liked this content, if you disagree (or if you do agree), please leave a comment. Of course, upvotes, follows, resteems are all greatly appreciated, but nothing brings me and you more growth than sharing our ideas.