Home | About | Donate

John Oliver: Trump Climate Decision Is Behavior of Destructive 'Egomaniac'


#1

John Oliver: Trump Climate Decision Is Behavior of Destructive 'Egomaniac'

Common Dreams staff

It took comedian John Oliver just over twenty minutes on Sunday night to destroy nearly everything said during President Donald Trump's announcement last Thursday to withdraw the United States from the international Paris agreement on climate change.

Calling Trump "a fucking egomaniac" with a "ludicrous misunderstanding" of the Paris deal and human-caused global warming, Oliver could hardly contain his exasperation as he performed a running fact-check of the president's remarks.


#3

Drumpf is clearly a dickhead, but Oliver doesn't seem to realize how precarious our current situation is--the possibility that warming will be accelerating so rapidly that our species will be extinct before 2021! http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2017/05/abrupt-warming-how-much-and-how-fast.html


#4

There are two reasons why our species is doomed: (1) Activities that have been causing global warming (the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and reproduction--with a resulting huge world population) and (2) our failure to recognize how serious the problem is--as indicated by the Paris Accord, as you accurately note.


#5

Behavior of Destructive 'Egomaniac' or at least a main stream Republican.


#6

Another reason -- we are apparently doomed to be who we have always been as human beings. There is no arc of civilization. What is happening now is not new when considering historically documented flaws in human behavior -- we are just technologically more advanced and capable of doing damage on a far larger scale. Human depredation has existed since the beginning of humanity. The Bible clearly documents it from 5000 years ago, and history since then reveals a species whose instincts for destruction, self and otherwise, lead over and over and over to war, and the elevation to power people who would destroy what others have built. Now, the US has become just another lesson from history, dancing around the golden calf, elevating wealth and power over the very existence of the world. Our species' destructive flaws are now on full display, same old same old. While I may be interested in philosophy and possible redemption, nature does not give a shit and, as with other species who have outlived their place in nature, will extinguish the metasticized menace to the planet we have become.


#7

Nonsensical tin-foil hat alarmism like "extinction in next 3-4 years" is about a damaging to taking action on AGW as full-blown denialism is. The issue to understand her is that the real dangerous impacts will be our legacy to future generations 100 years from now. The job is to get people to care about that the impacts of that legacy, on people they will never know, long after they are dead.


#8

Trump is living proof of Chomsky's statement that the " REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE MOST DANGEROUS ORGANIZATION IN HUMAN HISTORY"!

Nero fiddled while Rome burnt, but Trump is far more dangerous, because he tweets his insanity that climate change is a Chinese hoax... while our whole planet burns!


#9

Just a little meandering thought from a progressive?


#10

Gosh darn good thing Trump exposed it then. Damn that obama!


#11

Jared Diamond's "Collapse" points out how past societies collapsed, the difference with our current situation is that with a globally interconnected society, it will be a global collapse when we go. People really have no concept how dire the current situation is and how the numerous positive feedback loops are accelerating the problems. More than one serious climate scientist has stated that we are pretty much "fucked", in exactly that term.


#12

100 years from now? Global warming is not the only threat to civilization. It has been estimated that there may be as few as 60 harvest seasons left before global topsoil is depleted by current farming methods. The acidification of the ocean also threatens the Earth's oxygen supply.


#13

You are correct. A lot of talk and speeches, and not much action:


#14

I see the Neolithic Revolution as representing a significant break in human history. Sociobiologist David Barash has pointed out that as human ways of life began to change, their biology remained basically the same--creating a "discrepancy" between the (1) way of life for which we had become "designed" and (2) the new ways of life that were developing. That discrepancy can be seen as the root of virtually all of our problems ever since--including the likelihood that we'll soon go extinct!


#15

Believe what you want--makes no difference to me!


#16
  1. Topsoil depleted has always occurred going back to the first large farms of Mesopotamia, Indus or Mesoamerica 5000 years ago. That is why fertilizers (natural or synthetic) have been used going back that far.

  2. Ocean acidification could indeed cause a dangerous drop in O2 in the atmosphere - but based on evidence from the P-Tr mass extinction, this geologically near-instantaneous event is still a couple thousand years on the human scale. I remain flummoxed at this accusation that by putting the worst impact of AGW on a proper geologic time scale is an appeal not to care. It is an appeal to quite the opposite - to expand out caring so that we can take action NOW to prevent a unstoppable path to catastrophe a thousand years from now - which is NOT a long time even on human time frames.


#17

Yes, and yet Trump rejected even this ineffective, purely voluntary agreement that can be broken at any time. Do you think that Thump would have stayed in had it been tough with binding sanctions? What is your point - except to engage in whataboutist fallacies pursuant to a vague "Trump isn't so bad" argument? This seems to be quite popular among this new type of leftist that has arisen over the past year or so.


#18

It's funny how you attack Arctic News Blog as "tin-foil hat" stuff, yet you cannot refute a single scientific fact stated there. That four year timeline is a conjecture, and like it or not a real possibility. Further, it is absolutely moronic to insist that telling people there is a threat 100 years in the future is going to motivate them to change anything. That is a joke.

Then you go on to attack someone who pointed out what an ineffectual failure the Paris agreement was. This is widely known, was widely reported here at CD at the time of the signing, and isn't even remotely controversial. Yet you attack that FACT by smearing the person who brings it up as some sort of closet Trump supporter.

Finally you attempt to tar anyone who points out these sorts of truths —you know, the kind of truths that make neoliberal Hillary and Obama boosters squirm— as some sort of bad leftists.

Basically, you appear to be a con artist and a liar, using ad hominem atttacks to police discourse around here in an attempt to channel it into a neoliberal framework, presumably in support of pro-capitalist and pro-globalist politicians and policies. You sound in fact like a typical neoliberal Democrat, misrepresenting yourself as a "leftist."

In short: you come across as a transparent snake, and at a politically sophisticated site like CD you won't get away with that without people calling you exactly that.


#19

Gotta love those apocalyptic websites... the only thing missing is a countdown to the second.

So we're facing catastrophic extinction within 4 years, but if we just go along with the Paris decisions everything will be hunky dory. And people are wondering why AGW proponents are not being taken seriously.


#20

Yes, but modern mechanized agriculture has accelerated the process. It takes about 1000 years to generate 3 cm of topsoil, but we are losing it at a much higher rate these days.

Ocean acidification is also not proceeding at a geologic time scale, but rather at astonishingly rapid pace such that the biome does not have time to adapt and evolve.

But I agree that regardless we should care about solving the problem.


#21

One thing that absolutely does NOT work in prompting action is chicken-little behavior. In fact, it accomplishes exactly the opposite. And even worse, you are openly advocating fabricating propaganda falsehood over science.