Discover more from Douglass’s Newsletter
The NYT has this morning:
As the French presidential elections approach, the Greens are struggling to convince voters that they can take radical climate action while effectively addressing economic insecurity.
Effective means stopping co2 and economic security would men not changing anything.
The narrative that can avoid the dilemma is one of extreme cooperation, luck and complexity. Basically it requires finding ways of meeting need for food, shelter and security while using less energy. One way to do this is with extreme use of network communications and AI to manage the whole process, but this process would be owned by corporations that are also looking to make a profit, which would have to be forsworn. Could the whole process by nationalized with global coordination?
Let’s say an agreement emerges that we need something like tis. The doing of it would be brutal, myopic, unfair to many. But necessary? Is there an alternative global scenario? That faces the facts?
2518.The conflict.
Shelter, food and water are needed for security -- and because we live in a connected world, everyone must have them for anyone to be secure. I gave you several resources earlier today (responding to a different post) which cover most of the ground necessary to achieve it. Our company and allies are working on the technologies to take it the rest of the way. Please explore the other resources thoroughly (at the level of the scholar you are), add them up in the face of the problem, and then let me know where you see them falling short IF WIDELY ADOPTED AND SUPPORTED. Mark