good a while ago
I have seen this m circulating through
internet is a photo of the extraction of
petroleum in the oil sands of
alberta in canada and the phrase if that’s good
for the economy
fuck economy possibly seeing
this image at a first moment
have even agreed it’s true fuck
economy maybe more immediately
after some reflection you have seen
in this image
everything that we normally do
tends to recognize as being the
problems of environmental discourse is that
it would be a sentimental speech that he
calls for these images to shock
explores a much more affective relationship
one of them a reaction to rational one
certain ingenuity is not a thought a
little immature because he is unable to
deal with the reality of things and why
ultimately an inability to understand the
all
because after all we do not
could just say
dane if the economy we need to da
economy and we will need it
this kind of thing and it seems
usually in this way
environmental issues when they appear
in the public debate are disqualified from
first hand
before the people start it screens
seriously these issues already are already the
depreciated are neglected by
account of these prejudices
their association with the
the naive sentimentality ingenuity to
opposition as opposed to what
would be rationality to maturity and
universality of rationality
economic
rationality that understands that you do not
can make a man
even without breaking eggs, what do you understand?
that known that known
aphorism that would summarize the rationality
that it is impossible to
what there is no free lunch
to all this means that before
to be discussed
environmental issues are already output
treated as claims and real or and
realistic
is it anyway
This is what I would like to discuss here.
with you the first thing we have
today the overwhelming consensus of the
scientific research using the
more rational methods
the scientific community knows it
global warming is a reality
the anthropogenic origin of global warming
it is a reality it is caused by man
and that therefore things like this that the
people see here in the photo is the extraction of
need to finish the oil has
that staying on earth no longer exists
capacity in the Earth’s atmosphere for
the carbon that is stored in this
and that it will be burned from
the moment he is the
available for consumption
more important than that, but we are
wondering what is more universal is
obvious that the realism of rationality
is related to a reality with
this reality is economy
production circulation and consumption of goods
by humans
where do these goods come from?
energy that produces these goods and which
ensures their circulation is evident
that the economy is a relative reality
particularly in relation to a reality
wider more universal than is the
physical system
and that is the whole point
in the face of scientific evidence that not
we are today being realistic about
economy without first being realistic in
relation to the environment is like saying
that we can have the resources
without ever paying the invoice of this
is to complement the belief of
that you can not make an omelette without
break eggs with faith in a chicken of the
golden eggs that will continue to give us
eggs forever a first response
that economic rationality could
it would be okay to face it
global warming exists, it is a
market failure
it can be corrected by the market
we need to rely on the ability of the
the market to correct this problem
market that the problem
This is why this assumes that the objective of
market is to produce the common good
or in this case defending the environment
environment
sometimes this is not what drives the agents
economic market that takes
economic agents, the market is the
of environmental tragedies like
those accidental eg Marian
mines or those made of
if thought as a beautiful hill
they do not happen by mistake
they happen because they are a
from the point of view of the search for
profit for those economic agents to
speak without saying that the good of the
and for the good of society
stems from the fact that neither the
nor society is a thing only
economy distributes the goods in a
always more or less uneven so
but also distributes the costs of
production of this good in an unequal way
but there is one last argument from
economic rationality and it would
at first sight to be definitive
now if we agree
that the biggest problem we have today
in a country like Brazil but also in
everyone is a problem of inequality
Social
one can not tackle the problem of
social inequality without growth
is creating more equality and
more social justice needs to grow
So I need things like this that
people see it at first sight
this may seem like a realistic argument
Of course if we forget the fact that
what scientists all tell us
today it is no longer realistic to follow
oil from the ground eg the
still taking a card but the question is not
if it seems that we would be
then there in front of a dilemma
face of a choice or social justice
the environment where the problem is
in this argument obviously in what the
argument does not say when
choice or social justice growth
what this argument is
doing is shielding a thing from which he
You are not saying that is the wealth already
existing
now it would be perfectly possible
fight against growing inequality –
distribute the wealth that has already
exists is because a considerable part
left abandoned the old
such as taxation of
great fortunes or as taxation
of the inheritances she needs today.
commitment to growth
limited economic growth in order to
commitment to combating
inequality with social justice is this
that takes that left
so flirting in denialism
climatic
I think that from this argument the
We can say that the issues
tyson that the environmental concern as
not only would not be contrary to the
fight against inequality but it can
us to offer a maximum for action to
action for social justice that is before the
environmental crisis we live in
wake up have to munch on the plus side
strong is the cost of transition to
economy with another energy base is a
face that necessarily has to be
marked by those who profited more from the base
energy we have today.
it is impossible to continue growing so
rampant and if we do not want to
to abandon the principle of
social justice is necessary then
dissociate the idea of social justice
idea of economic growth can not
just say we all need
make sacrifices when both profits
how much damage
in this historical curve that has brought us
environmental crisis have always been
unevenly distributed
so to conclude what we have
there it seems to me that the
environmental concern that the fight
against global warming and all that
follows for example against the
the oil industry not only a
elitist which is more realistic than
believe in the market solutions that
these are the same solutions that have been
attempted
already in the last three decades and have
results that we are seeing ie
none
It’s true that people understand ecological
as synonymous with complex or systemic
many times what we saw of the
environmental activism was nothing of the
perhaps it was just the opposite not
is a practice that thought about environment and
humanity as
so external to one another that they
focused on effects rather than on
and that it was thus also
often satisfied with the
conchavos of the cabinet and the measures
the more superficial the market seems to me
that from this argument that I
I put it for you here today.
You can think of another possibility
we certainly have the opportunity
we need to overcome this
ancient cosmetic environmentalism
exclusively middle class and think
in another environmentalism from the
populations that suffer most directly from
the effect of processes such as those in open
how beautiful mount with mariana here in
Brazil
in the direction of a project that
a broad social basis for which
social justice and environmental justice are
inseparable
this is possible it is difficult to know more
maybe one day in the future we’ll look
back and realize that this was the
only realistic alternative
Thank you Marielly for example.
I have seen this m circulating through
internet is a photo of the extraction of
petroleum in the oil sands of
alberta in canada and the phrase if that’s good
for the economy
fuck economy possibly seeing
this image at a first moment
have even agreed it’s true fuck
economy maybe more immediately
after some reflection you have seen
in this image
everything that we normally do
tends to recognize as being the
problems of environmental discourse is that
it would be a sentimental speech that he
calls for these images to shock
explores a much more affective relationship
one of them a reaction to rational one
certain ingenuity is not a thought a
little immature because he is unable to
deal with the reality of things and why
ultimately an inability to understand the
all
because after all we do not
could just say
dane if the economy we need to da
economy and we will need it
this kind of thing and it seems
usually in this way
environmental issues when they appear
in the public debate are disqualified from
first hand
before the people start it screens
seriously these issues already are already the
depreciated are neglected by
account of these prejudices
their association with the
the naive sentimentality ingenuity to
opposition as opposed to what
would be rationality to maturity and
universality of rationality
economic
rationality that understands that you do not
can make a man
even without breaking eggs, what do you understand?
that known that known
aphorism that would summarize the rationality
that it is impossible to
what there is no free lunch
to all this means that before
to be discussed
environmental issues are already output
treated as claims and real or and
realistic
is it anyway
This is what I would like to discuss here.
with you the first thing we have
today the overwhelming consensus of the
scientific research using the
more rational methods
the scientific community knows it
global warming is a reality
the anthropogenic origin of global warming
it is a reality it is caused by man
and that therefore things like this that the
people see here in the photo is the extraction of
need to finish the oil has
that staying on earth no longer exists
capacity in the Earth’s atmosphere for
the carbon that is stored in this
and that it will be burned from
the moment he is the
available for consumption
more important than that, but we are
wondering what is more universal is
obvious that the realism of rationality
is related to a reality with
this reality is economy
production circulation and consumption of goods
by humans
where do these goods come from?
energy that produces these goods and which
ensures their circulation is evident
that the economy is a relative reality
particularly in relation to a reality
wider more universal than is the
physical system
and that is the whole point
in the face of scientific evidence that not
we are today being realistic about
economy without first being realistic in
relation to the environment is like saying
that we can have the resources
without ever paying the invoice of this
is to complement the belief of
that you can not make an omelette without
break eggs with faith in a chicken of the
golden eggs that will continue to give us
eggs forever a first response
that economic rationality could
it would be okay to face it
global warming exists, it is a
market failure
it can be corrected by the market
we need to rely on the ability of the
the market to correct this problem
market that the problem
This is why this assumes that the objective of
market is to produce the common good
or in this case defending the environment
environment
sometimes this is not what drives the agents
economic market that takes
economic agents, the market is the
of environmental tragedies like
those accidental eg Marian
mines or those made of
if thought as a beautiful hill
they do not happen by mistake
they happen because they are a
from the point of view of the search for
profit for those economic agents to
speak without saying that the good of the
and for the good of society
stems from the fact that neither the
nor society is a thing only
economy distributes the goods in a
always more or less uneven so
but also distributes the costs of
production of this good in an unequal way
but there is one last argument from
economic rationality and it would
at first sight to be definitive
now if we agree
that the biggest problem we have today
in a country like Brazil but also in
everyone is a problem of inequality
Social
one can not tackle the problem of
social inequality without growth
is creating more equality and
more social justice needs to grow
So I need things like this that
people see it at first sight
this may seem like a realistic argument
Of course if we forget the fact that
what scientists all tell us
today it is no longer realistic to follow
oil from the ground eg the
still taking a card but the question is not
if it seems that we would be
then there in front of a dilemma
face of a choice or social justice
the environment where the problem is
in this argument obviously in what the
argument does not say when
choice or social justice growth
what this argument is
doing is shielding a thing from which he
You are not saying that is the wealth already
existing
now it would be perfectly possible
fight against growing inequality –
distribute the wealth that has already
exists is because a considerable part
left abandoned the old
such as taxation of
great fortunes or as taxation
of the inheritances she needs today.
commitment to growth
limited economic growth in order to
commitment to combating
inequality with social justice is this
that takes that left
so flirting in denialism
climatic
I think that from this argument the
We can say that the issues
tyson that the environmental concern as
not only would not be contrary to the
fight against inequality but it can
us to offer a maximum for action to
action for social justice that is before the
environmental crisis we live in
wake up have to munch on the plus side
strong is the cost of transition to
economy with another energy base is a
face that necessarily has to be
marked by those who profited more from the base
energy we have today.
it is impossible to continue growing so
rampant and if we do not want to
to abandon the principle of
social justice is necessary then
dissociate the idea of social justice
idea of economic growth can not
just say we all need
make sacrifices when both profits
how much damage
in this historical curve that has brought us
environmental crisis have always been
unevenly distributed
so to conclude what we have
there it seems to me that the
environmental concern that the fight
against global warming and all that
follows for example against the
the oil industry not only a
elitist which is more realistic than
believe in the market solutions that
these are the same solutions that have been
attempted
already in the last three decades and have
results that we are seeing ie
none
It’s true that people understand ecological
as synonymous with complex or systemic
many times what we saw of the
environmental activism was nothing of the
perhaps it was just the opposite not
is a practice that thought about environment and
humanity as
so external to one another that they
focused on effects rather than on
and that it was thus also
often satisfied with the
conchavos of the cabinet and the measures
the more superficial the market seems to me
that from this argument that I
I put it for you here today.
You can think of another possibility
we certainly have the opportunity
we need to overcome this
ancient cosmetic environmentalism
exclusively middle class and think
in another environmentalism from the
populations that suffer most directly from
the effect of processes such as those in open
how beautiful mount with mariana here in
Brazil
in the direction of a project that
a broad social basis for which
social justice and environmental justice are
inseparable
this is possible it is difficult to know more
maybe one day in the future we’ll look
back and realize that this was the
only realistic alternative
Thank you Marielly for example.
Please follow and like us: