tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post7925260406355747981..comments2024-03-28T06:43:02.954+00:00Comments on Variable Variability: Ottmar Edenhofer in 2010 on international climate politics and redistribution of wealthVictor Venemahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-30298108448795924302017-09-04T19:47:02.659+01:002017-09-04T19:47:02.659+01:00VV: "Climate change can be perfectly solved i...VV: "Climate change can be perfectly solved in open societies with capitalist markets. The problem is crony capitalism."<br /><br />I agree that anthropogenic climate change can be solved in open societies with capitalist markets, if purchasing elections were illegal; flooding the public sphere with professionally-crafted bespoke disinformation ought to be legally restricted too, or least clearly labeled as deceptive.<br /><br />However, it should be clear that capitalist markets will always externalize every cost they're allowed to get away with. If externalities were always easy to cost, collective intervention in 'free' markets could eliminate Dramas of the Commons. It seems plausible to me, though, that the incommensurability of socialized (including environmental) costs with the private benefits of goods and services is what has driven 'civilization' since the invention of agriculture released <i>Homo sapiens</i> populations from local ecological carrying capacity.<br /><br />WC: "freedom is a goal."<br /><br />Right, it's not a suicide pact. Unless you're a deontological libertarian, that is. Everyone else is a consequentialist libertarian.Mal Adaptedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06123525780458234978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-44736345670694804892017-08-06T16:33:15.801+01:002017-08-06T16:33:15.801+01:00Freedom is a goal. For me free markets are a tool....Freedom is a goal. For me free markets are a tool. In a highly unequal world, free markets do not optimise freedom. A minor inconvenience for a billionaire can economically be worth more than the life of a poor person. Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-41475326163018593192017-08-06T16:22:10.875+01:002017-08-06T16:22:10.875+01:00No: capitalism is not a goal. It is at best a tool...No: capitalism is not a goal. It is at best a tool. Also I think you're making the usual non-distinction between capitalism and free markets but the two are distinct. Free markets are indeed a goal because they are s subsdt of freedom. And freedom is a goal.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-74256577356544281642017-08-06T16:12:03.934+01:002017-08-06T16:12:03.934+01:00Yes, 6% of the economy changing ownership is a big...Yes, 6% of the economy changing ownership is a big deal. Because you cited Klein and because many mitigation sceptics say that capitalism is threatened I had interpreted "huge implications" as more than 6% of the economy changing from the old money establishment to entrepreneurs, but as a change in the way we live and work. I think the greens are aware they are fighting an economically powerful machine.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-46293282838357858582017-08-06T16:01:30.372+01:002017-08-06T16:01:30.372+01:00You misread my comment Victor.
Klein was observin...You misread my comment Victor.<br /><br />Klein was observing that the denialists at Heartland and elsewhere understood the huge implications of CC to the economy better than most 'greens'.<br /><br />I was saying that Edenhofer understood the huge implications of CC to the economy.<br /><br />One might say that it is bleedingly obvious.<br /><br />They almost certainly don't agree on the response to this understanding, but it is odd that Edenhofer is attacked for stating the bleeding obvious!Richard Erskinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01489722240823843151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-1854883041110255642017-08-06T15:54:44.638+01:002017-08-06T15:54:44.638+01:00Not so sure Edenhofer agrees with Klein. Edenhofer...Not so sure Edenhofer agrees with Klein. Edenhofer more likely agrees with liberal values and a large part of the economy being based on profit seeking. <br /><br />Climate change can be perfectly solved in open societies with capitalist markets. The problem is crony capitalism. <br /><br />For William Connolley capitalism seems to be the goal and the profit principle a replacement for many moral considerations. For me markets are just a very powerful tool, a tool that complements free societies, but the aims should be decided upon by society. It often sounds as if Noami Klein would like to get rid of capitalism no matter what.<br /><br />Those are different visions of what a good society looks like, how humans are and what is possible. In all these world views we can solve climate change. <br /><br />The losers of solving the problem would be (older) egoists, crony capitalists and social Darwinists.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-3865255880150412332017-08-06T15:26:40.628+01:002017-08-06T15:26:40.628+01:00In her book, This Changes Everything, Naomi Klein ...In her book, This Changes Everything, Naomi Klein analyses the way the Heartland Institute and other "denialists" approach the issue of man-made climate change (page 43, para. 4) …<br /><i>"So here's my inconvenient truth: I think these hard-core ideologues understand the real significance of climate change better than most of the 'warmists' in the political center, the ones who are still insisting that the response can be gradual and painless … when it comes to the political and economic consequences of [the] scientific findings, specifically the kind of deep changes required not just to our energy consumption but to the underlying logic of our liberalized and profit-seeking economy, the have their eyes wide open."</i><br /><br />So Ottmar Edenhofer is simply agreeing with this appreciation of the implications.<br /><br />And this is why …<br /><i>"… the ideological warriors … concluded that there is really only one way to beat a threat this big: by claiming that thousands upon thousands of scientists are lying and that climate change is an elaborate hoax."</i><br />Richard Erskinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01489722240823843151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-67574540052582832182017-08-05T14:29:08.722+01:002017-08-05T14:29:08.722+01:00Thanks for revisiting this. A couple of years ago ...Thanks for revisiting this. A couple of years ago I ran Edenhofer's remarks though Google Translate to obtain a rougher translation than what you provide here.<br /><br />At the time, I thought they were perfectly true, but tactically unwise since they would be cherry-picked or quote-mined by climate change contrarians and conspiracy theorists.<br /><br />Critically, I had only translated the first two paragraphs and omitted the third, which wraps up Edenhofer's ethical and economic argument with a neat logical symmetry.Magmanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-84843264326859889972017-08-04T20:40:34.237+01:002017-08-04T20:40:34.237+01:00FWIW, Edenhofer comes up http://scienceblogs.com/s...FWIW, Edenhofer comes up http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/05/02/peabody-coals-contrarian-scientist-witnesses-lose-their-court-case/ (including your previous translation) and very slightly the same guy raised the same quote at http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/04/26/yet-more-carbon-tax/William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com