… “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?” The event. That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, solar storm, unstoppable virus, or malicious computer hack that takes everything down.
This single question occupied us for the rest of the hour. They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from raiders as well as angry mobs. One had already secured a dozen Navy Seals to make their way to his compound if he gave them the right cue. But how would he pay the guards once even his crypto was worthless? What would stop the guards from eventually choosing their own leader?
The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers – if that technology could be developed “in time”. …
Those guards are definitely going to let their children die just to help them out. They’re just taking his money and never going to do a thing for them.
Also - only you know the combination to the food storage. But they know “enhanced interrogation techniques”.
Maybe the secret to survival is community based living focused on what is good for the community as a whole…but that seems far fetched and downright socialist /s
Yup, anyone with sense would try to prevent “the event” instead of spending time and money trying to wipe everyone else out! I would’ve suggested they watch “Don’t Look Up,” before standing back while they scrambled to build another spacecraft.
Who the fuck is “wall Street Silver”? The fuck they know about the environmental cost of meat based/pasturage monoculture in NorthWestern Europe? Fucking nothing I’d be pretty sure.
Just a hard right dickhead muddying the water.
I note the only person I know who follows them is an anti-vaxxer doctor I use as the least offensive bellweather of what the Irish fash are pushing now.
I’m not going to answer the “substance” of the tweet because obvious fash are obvious fash. It’s bollocks and they have no interest in or expertise on the environment. Or media ownership for that matter.
So you’re saying organic pasture-fed beef and lamb really are the most damaging farm products?
I mean, if Gates did donate to those two major publications, and they really are acting accordingly, i think that does suck. And on this topic, it’s also alarming because Gates has been buying up a LOT of farm land lately.
I just finished George Monbiot’s “Regenesis”, which is the basis for that article. The book is based on a truly impressive body of research. He makes a very (very) good case that the key driver of environmental damage by farming is the acreage it requires.
Monbiot wants us to quantify in terms of the objective “feed the planet without destroying it”, rather than romanticize based on our deeply ingrained cultural ideal of pastoral simplicity. Low yield comes out as much the enemy as high intensity. “Pasture fed” livestock scores badly because of thin stocking rates.
It is a really, really hard book to summarize; most articles end up focusing on a small section. It is well written, synthesizes a lot of scientific material, and also addresses social and cultural challenges. I’m convinced on the basis of the science, but the ideas will not be popular with most farmers. A lot of sacred cows and holy lambs get slaughtered.
@Simon_CliftRegenesis is also on my list. I have friends who farm small holdings.
Argh. I am sorry to have posted his spew, then.
I did not know and did not dig for more background on this person on Twitter. Perhaps this HRD is jealous he doesn’t own all that farmland? or hasn’t the massive pile of money Gates has to buy his own [dictated] media coverage?
Many results return on the search engine query “Bill Gates” “given money” and “media outlets” which are links to various lesser known web sites with who-knows-what-agenda. So here’s at least a web site whose agenda I do know, and whose articles I do read and tend to agree with more or less…
“Underexamined.”
Yikes.
So I am sincerely wondering WTF is Monbiot on about, and whether the money that The Grauniad may have rececived from Bill Gates has created any opportunity for Gates, at least, to ventilate his agenda on that platform. Or whether Monbiot is simply agreeing on the common ground, if such exists, between whatever Gates wants out of his copious farmland acreage and whatever Monbiot wants.
My media diet is scattershot at best.
I regret this error of giving HRDs airtime and brainspace.
Since we’re talking about it, I suppose I should not delete this HRD’s tweet now or this bbs thread will not have context.
This has been my thinking for a while now.
I have no idea what is ultimate plan is for all that land. Is he just interested in its ability to sequester carbon?
Has Gates taken Monbiot’s advice to heart?..
… is he giving away his money to those foundations [or other recipients like The Guardian] aligned with his values?
Is he doing one of those “only billionaires can save us / right thing for right or wrong reasons” deals?
Regardless of my useless speculating, when I read this stuff, I am not jumping for joy over here:
Here’s Reuters making a fine distinction between “the guy owning the most farmland” and “of total farming acreage, does Gates own the majority?” which to me sounds like “calm down, calm down: Gates doesn’t own the majority of farmland in the U.S.” … which feels like a misdirection:
With all these record-breaking yachts being built these days I’m kinda surprised that no Billionaire has yet stepped up to buy this thing and convert it into a private yacht that, at 1,122 feet in length, would be more than twice as long as the current largest super yacht. These guys all love bragging about length, right?
Musk would buy it, then jam it in the Suez canal, then charge people to take an exclusive canal of his own making to bypass it. Fees may only be paid in NFTs.
Just trying to come up with the stupidest thing you could do with it.
Monbiot has been writing on this for decades, his opinions have changed throughout (he’s been for and against nuclear power at different times for example) but as far as I remember he has always been keen to minimise meat as a main source of food for two reasons:
1 it’s an inefficient use of land to feed people (and the knock on effects of that are multiple)
2 pasturage monoculture in Britain (and Ireland) creates upland deserts and flooding downstream
The Guardian has been publishing his columns throughout whether Billg was paying them or not. I’d be more concerned about whether the Grauniad covered vaccines sensibly - advocating strongly for TRIPS waivers for the world to produce the state funded vaccines so that we didn’t have a pissing and non-pissing end of the pool the way we did with COVID having learnt exactly the wrong episode from the AIDS pandemic.
I’ve not read him for about 10 years, but I can always respect someone who changes their mind when presented with new evidence. I’ll be looking to grab a copy of the book upthread. Thanks.
I think with nuclear it was that he was faced with more urgency than expected. I’m not sure what his stance on it is currently. It’s not his core concern really, energy, so much as eco economics and the biome.
I am grateful for Monbiot’s work.
Most of the time I find myself agreeing with what he says.
I stopped eating meat in 1980.
I stopped consuming dairy products on all but special occasions in 2005.
My family has been vegetarian for decades (some dairy here and there, and ok oh uh eggs for the offspring in college).
As our planet’s atmospheric CO2 parts per million spirals higher, plenty of environmentalists I have been tracking have been likewise changing their minds to a “all options on the table” view of lowering carbon footprints on all fronts.
I do not love the push toward more hydroelectric and more nuclear power generation plants. I understand why arguments are being made in favor. I just find the trade-offs questionable… another thread… perhaps… I am aware I am OT.
True.
Agreed.
Discussion of vaccines is now such a lightning rod.
And thankless, sometimes.
Even making the case for science-based, evidence-based action on a public platform these days is to invite crazies to target spokespeople and publications for all kinds of harassment, some violent. Ugh.
Thanks for holding me accountable. And for pushing back.
And to be clear there is exactly zero evidence that this is the case in the tweets from the far right grifter here. In fact, he is precisely at odds with the Gates foundation’s approach in his writing that I have read.
First link is about a response from Africa to the kind of farming which Gates supports (and which George Monbiot does not), other two are particular articles calling out Gates as the problem.
ETA I didn’t put this in as it was earlier and may have preceded funding to the Grauniad but as it rips into Bono as well as Gates it’s extra fun
I would’ve suggested they watch “
