Wasn’t diversifying US energy sources also a national security issue? And wind energy was set aside because, wait for it, they killed animals. Birds to be specific.
Remember when we destroyed Iran's nuclear program before we destroyed it last month? This administration is perfectly consistent with being inconsistent.
I'm not sure about all wind energy, but offshore wind energy has been set aside because Donald Trump's Scotland Golf Club lost a lawsuit to an offshore wind farm a decade ago, and he appears to have a blanket opposition to the concept ever since.
(personal commentary/context: I want more energy production of any economically viable category: wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal, natural gas, etc. I have no blanket opposition to offshore oil drilling or offshore wind energy)
The folks in charge just want what they want without rhyme or reason. Mix a mind virus and joy of power together and get your eratic clown show. And many times it can go on a lot longer than you'd ever guess.
Unfortunately as a society we keep moving further and further away from the foundations of a functional society based on a representative government and considering the general welfare.
None of this should come as a surprise. The scoundrels got the mob in power (again) and they’re just going to keep breaking things and stealing the money until stopped or dead.
That’s not the point. The point is if you lose a presidential election to a grifter, most folks are screwed in almost unlimited ways. Don’t lose an election to a grifter. Be more practical when it comes to not losing an election to a grifter next time.
Of the 13 billion barrels of oil the US produces every day, 1.5 billion (15%) comes from the gulf. Despite this being more than enough oil (we are a net-exporter of oil), we import crude oil because our refineries need a different type of crude. The extra 15% of oil we are killing the environment over is for making a profit to export to other nations. It is not for national security.
Guess which nation also has this heavy type of crude oil? Venezuela, which was invaded earlier this year.
If I recall correctly, the US used to have more of this type of oil, that depleted, so now they still have all the refineries on the east coast and need to import it.
2028: "To be secure as a nation we need to stamp out all dissent against the government and require all citizens to swear unyielding loyalty to the President."
The thing says they can now dispose of trash and do loud things in the Gulf of Mexico (America haha). But what does that actually get us?
Googling and LLMing around it allows normal sea operations in the Gulf so drilling is possible etc. Interesting. So they’re going to try to get more oil out of there?
Can’t say I trust their competence very much here. It’s more likely to be a carve out for a friend than anything else and I’m pretty pro deregulation in general.
This is more preemptive I suspect- 'they' have been reclassifying different species trying to get a bona-fide Gulf endangered one to use against exploration and production. Especially that one whale subspecies.
The goal for these companies is not to extract more oil. This is the bait. They want to produce the same amount of oil they already do, but pay less for the expenses of doing anything to comply with regulations.
Who said anything about "us". Every action taken by this administration is specifically for self-enrichment (directly or to cronies/patrons), the destruction of things that they deem "woke", and the punishment and persecution of their perceived enemies and non-humans.
I wish that was hyperbole, and that I could be proven wrong.
I always thought Trump was such a joke. Completely non-threatening, just a big personality who kept popping up here and there. I even bought a MAGA hat back in the summer before the election explicitly because I thought it was hysterical he was even running, and knew he would lose. I thought the whole thing was a gag, a joke, just like Bloomberg. It didn't even cross my mind that someone so woefully inadequate for the position, so abrasive, so criminal, so disgusting -- could ever get elected to the presidency. In the grand scheme of the universe, he was a nobody. His name would have died with him.
Boy was I wrong. His name will be studied for decades to come in all the worst ways.
He definitely combines traits from a best hits list of notorious leaders, ranging from King George III, Kaiser Wilhelm, Santa Ana, Porfirio Díaz, and more.
And Americans are supposed to understand this, but largely don't. Kind of like lots of people love the founders in theory, but act like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would have loved a theocracy. And basically don't know anything about stuff that would have influenced them, like the Commonwealth and the Glorious Revolution.
Honest is a word that can never be associated with the man, other than an antonym.
He's also a hypocrite (he wields Christianity like a weapon but is not a believer), talks about law and order but believes it doesn't apply to him, etc.
If I had to use one word in that vein it would be "clear". He makes it very clear who he is and what his values are.
Oppositional defiant disorder on a cultural scale. Liberals want to protect animals and shift to use of green energy; therefore the fossil fuel industry must be promoted at all cost (even when they don't want to be, as with Trump forcing obsolete coal plants to remain open) and endangered animals must be killed off.
I've noticed this for MAGA people I've met in real life but for the people actually making decisions, this administration (and their friends/political donors) has been making too much money for basic greed to not also be a huge factor.
Don’t say US. They don’t speak for us all. Only 49.8% of voters. Of which I hope a significant portion have seen the error of their ways come midterms and the next election.
Every day is a new embarrassment law or action like this for America until then. I’ve never felt lower about America in my lifetime. The hope I had, the pride I felt in America, is gone, chunk by chunk, piece by piece, every day.
Why? I don't see this pedantry for headlines for other countries like China did this, the UK does that. I think it's well understood that it's referring to the government, not a generalization of its people.
My experience is the exact opposite. It is one of the most common points of pedantry I see in controversial political threads, across nations.
Not for no reason either. Turnout was 64.1%, so really it's the active decision of 31.9218% of voters (voting eligibles) culminating in this. Kind of a pattern with modern democracies if you check.
Not that passively endorsing this by not voting when the opportunity was there would be much better though.
I hate this line of reasoning. People who didn't vote are equally guilty, because they did not care enough to show up. Or, maybe, they just didn't make it to polling station on time for some reason (having to pick up kids from school, or working second shift or something). You should always assume that the result of the elections is representative of what society thinks. That's how elections (and opinion polls, for that matter) work. Unless you have a really good proof why some minority group was actively excluded from voting.
There is actually extensive mathematical history to fair voting, the output of which is super not in use, and of which I do find plenty of the alternative systems more representative:
Trump's exceptional, isn't he? He explicitly only governs for his base, and he's explicitly against those outside his base. Sure, he won a slim majority, but it's understood that democratically elected rulers govern all their citizens, if only to prevent electoral violence.
Everyone who sat out the 2016 and 2024 elections is responsible for this clown getting into office.
*Democracy is not a spectator sport*. You don't get to complain about corrupt politicians and then go on to make excuses about why you can't vote. You're wasting your citizenship. Either go vote or move to a dictatorship where voting isn't a concern.
> One species of Gulf whale is particularly vulnerable. Scientists estimate that only about 51 Rice's whales are left on Earth, all of them in waters of the Gulf of Mexico, which the Trump administration has termed the Gulf of America.
I don't think the animals that may go extinct care about the distinction.
I mean, I didn't vote for Trump, but I think it should be the US. This administration represents us on the global stage. You may not like it, and it may not feel fair, but we will all have to bear the consequences of their actions. Every day something like this happens--and is allowed to happen--is an embarrassment to all of us.
I voted against Trump 3 times. But people outside of the US should definitely act as if they cannot trust the US. Because they can't. I mean ffs we collectively elected him twice.
This is a good point. Instead of saying “The US” they should make up a number <50% and put that in the headline. That way it would be confusing and patently untrue
"Definitive of what capitalism is, this separation severely limits the scope of the political. Devolving vast aspects of social life to the rule of “the market” (in reality, to large corporations), it declares them off-limits to democratic decision-making, collective action, and public control. Its very structure, therefore, deprives us of the ability to decide collectively exactly what and how much we want to produce, on what energic basis and through what kinds of social relations. It deprives us, too, of the capacity to determine how we want to use the social surplus we collectively produce; how we want to relate to nature and to future generations; how we want to organize the work of social reproduction and its relation to that of production. Capitalism, in sum, is fundamentally anti-democratic. Even in the best-case scenario, democracy in a capitalist society must perforce be limited and weak."
There are very few purely capitalistic countries. All countries that I can think of use taxes and regulations to influence market equilibrium. „letting the market figure it out“ is usually the political expression for „I like the current state better than what the opposition proposed“.
I'm in a massive grain belt ATM, as a sign of the times I can't place whether that's a reference to GM crops or the immediate issue of fuel and fertilizer.
Capitalism (in the libertarian sense of the word) makes these "vast aspects of social life" off-limits to democratic deliberation in the same way it does for unrelated private corporations: without authorization from the rightful owners, it is supposed to be illegal (not to say that has stopped either).
She uses terms like "us", "we", "collective", but who are these? All the constituents, the people, in their totality, they are not, for people are not a homogeneous mass. In practice, it, along with democracy, just becomes a nice rhetoric device for stripping people of their rights.
Democracy was never really a good solution to an inclusive society-wide governance system. Most successful implementation even need to add limits to it to prevent the mob rule that's a feature to it. Some try to pretend it is anti-authoritarian, because the members get a vote. But that vote only matters when the voter is part of a majority. If they aren't, they might as well not even have it. That alone already creates a hierarchy. And it only gets worse: most people belong to minority of sorts, and they, by design, get alienated. This means that the doesn't really represent anyone... other than itself, very much like a corporation.
Which leads to the final point: capitalism (in the Marxist sense of the word) isn't antidemocratic. Democracy isn't in opposition to corporatocrocy, it requires a corporation large enough to own everything. Thus, dare I say, the democracy she seems to envision might as well be one of the forms of ultra peak capitalism.
And that’s why capitalists have been fundamental actors to bring XX AND XXI century fascism - it happened with Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, innumerable less prominent fascists in LatAm, and now the with the obscene caricature that is Trump and the uber rich to do their bidding.
The fascism of Europe in in the 1930s was EXPLICITLY anti-capitalist. You can read tons of statements by various prominent fascists about how capitalism was the tool of the British empire and "globalists"(they often used a different word). They viewed it as separating the people from the land. Capitalists were not in any way fundamental to the rise of Nazism.
If you're on about Pinochet, he only embraced market reforms 3 years after coming to power and came to power directly by a military coup. Business leaders had basically nothing to do with it.
Trump is also often anti capitalist, between tariffs and government shares in business. There is what fascists say and what they do, and industrialists were often very good Nazis.
Wasn’t diversifying US energy sources also a national security issue? And wind energy was set aside because, wait for it, they killed animals. Birds to be specific.
Remember when we destroyed Iran's nuclear program before we destroyed it last month? This administration is perfectly consistent with being inconsistent.
I'm not sure about all wind energy, but offshore wind energy has been set aside because Donald Trump's Scotland Golf Club lost a lawsuit to an offshore wind farm a decade ago, and he appears to have a blanket opposition to the concept ever since.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_International_Golf_Club_...
(personal commentary/context: I want more energy production of any economically viable category: wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal, natural gas, etc. I have no blanket opposition to offshore oil drilling or offshore wind energy)
The folks in charge just want what they want without rhyme or reason. Mix a mind virus and joy of power together and get your eratic clown show. And many times it can go on a lot longer than you'd ever guess.
Unfortunately as a society we keep moving further and further away from the foundations of a functional society based on a representative government and considering the general welfare.
The rhyme and the reason are pretty much this:
- I was able to make money off of this
- This pissed off the people I don’t like
None of this should come as a surprise. The scoundrels got the mob in power (again) and they’re just going to keep breaking things and stealing the money until stopped or dead.
That’s not the point. The point is if you lose a presidential election to a grifter, most folks are screwed in almost unlimited ways. Don’t lose an election to a grifter. Be more practical when it comes to not losing an election to a grifter next time.
Of the 13 billion barrels of oil the US produces every day, 1.5 billion (15%) comes from the gulf. Despite this being more than enough oil (we are a net-exporter of oil), we import crude oil because our refineries need a different type of crude. The extra 15% of oil we are killing the environment over is for making a profit to export to other nations. It is not for national security.
Guess which nation also has this heavy type of crude oil? Venezuela, which was invaded earlier this year.
If I recall correctly, the US used to have more of this type of oil, that depleted, so now they still have all the refineries on the east coast and need to import it.
It's millions of barrels per day not billions.
2028: "To be secure as a nation we need to stamp out all dissent against the government and require all citizens to swear unyielding loyalty to the President."
This is 100% coming barring a mass political rising
Start a war. Call dissent treason. Crush the left.
Capitalism falls back to fascism to protect wealth, time and time again.
They called the committee god squad?
The thing says they can now dispose of trash and do loud things in the Gulf of Mexico (America haha). But what does that actually get us?
Googling and LLMing around it allows normal sea operations in the Gulf so drilling is possible etc. Interesting. So they’re going to try to get more oil out of there?
Can’t say I trust their competence very much here. It’s more likely to be a carve out for a friend than anything else and I’m pretty pro deregulation in general.
This is more preemptive I suspect- 'they' have been reclassifying different species trying to get a bona-fide Gulf endangered one to use against exploration and production. Especially that one whale subspecies.
This kills that on multiple fronts.
The goal for these companies is not to extract more oil. This is the bait. They want to produce the same amount of oil they already do, but pay less for the expenses of doing anything to comply with regulations.
> But what does that actually get us?
Who said anything about "us". Every action taken by this administration is specifically for self-enrichment (directly or to cronies/patrons), the destruction of things that they deem "woke", and the punishment and persecution of their perceived enemies and non-humans.
I wish that was hyperbole, and that I could be proven wrong.
Note that they also increased the limit on Ethanol. Now, E15 is legal (instead of E10), again in the interest of “national security”.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/the-feds-plan-to-start-dilutin...
I always thought Trump was such a joke. Completely non-threatening, just a big personality who kept popping up here and there. I even bought a MAGA hat back in the summer before the election explicitly because I thought it was hysterical he was even running, and knew he would lose. I thought the whole thing was a gag, a joke, just like Bloomberg. It didn't even cross my mind that someone so woefully inadequate for the position, so abrasive, so criminal, so disgusting -- could ever get elected to the presidency. In the grand scheme of the universe, he was a nobody. His name would have died with him.
Boy was I wrong. His name will be studied for decades to come in all the worst ways.
He definitely combines traits from a best hits list of notorious leaders, ranging from King George III, Kaiser Wilhelm, Santa Ana, Porfirio Díaz, and more.
And Americans are supposed to understand this, but largely don't. Kind of like lots of people love the founders in theory, but act like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would have loved a theocracy. And basically don't know anything about stuff that would have influenced them, like the Commonwealth and the Glorious Revolution.
It's an absolutely literal Confederacy of Dunces.
All US presidents were war criminals and worse. Even St JFK. I'll cut some slack for FDR for dismantling the British Empire.
Trump is the first honest one, he's not a hypocrite, he's just a good old war criminal. His autobiography could be called "Mein Wahrheit."
Last week he announced Iran had offered to make him supreme leader.
Truth is not even vaguely relevant to anything out of that man's mouth.
Honest is a word that can never be associated with the man, other than an antonym.
He's also a hypocrite (he wields Christianity like a weapon but is not a believer), talks about law and order but believes it doesn't apply to him, etc.
If I had to use one word in that vein it would be "clear". He makes it very clear who he is and what his values are.
Oppositional defiant disorder on a cultural scale. Liberals want to protect animals and shift to use of green energy; therefore the fossil fuel industry must be promoted at all cost (even when they don't want to be, as with Trump forcing obsolete coal plants to remain open) and endangered animals must be killed off.
It often seems like the contemporary American "conservative" feels that in order to oppose progressives they must become regressives.
They are pretty much openly that way.
I've noticed this for MAGA people I've met in real life but for the people actually making decisions, this administration (and their friends/political donors) has been making too much money for basic greed to not also be a huge factor.
Nah, that's just bribes.
Let me rephrase that to provide a different connotation: Liberals want to kill economic progress to save a few animals.
Neither side is honest, it's just a matter of framing and perspective.
What would Trump have to do for you to not give him the benefit of the doubt from that point forward?
Wingardium Leviosa!
Don’t say US. They don’t speak for us all. Only 49.8% of voters. Of which I hope a significant portion have seen the error of their ways come midterms and the next election.
Every day is a new embarrassment law or action like this for America until then. I’ve never felt lower about America in my lifetime. The hope I had, the pride I felt in America, is gone, chunk by chunk, piece by piece, every day.
Why? I don't see this pedantry for headlines for other countries like China did this, the UK does that. I think it's well understood that it's referring to the government, not a generalization of its people.
My experience is the exact opposite. It is one of the most common points of pedantry I see in controversial political threads, across nations.
Not for no reason either. Turnout was 64.1%, so really it's the active decision of 31.9218% of voters (voting eligibles) culminating in this. Kind of a pattern with modern democracies if you check.
Not that passively endorsing this by not voting when the opportunity was there would be much better though.
I hate this line of reasoning. People who didn't vote are equally guilty, because they did not care enough to show up. Or, maybe, they just didn't make it to polling station on time for some reason (having to pick up kids from school, or working second shift or something). You should always assume that the result of the elections is representative of what society thinks. That's how elections (and opinion polls, for that matter) work. Unless you have a really good proof why some minority group was actively excluded from voting.
There is actually extensive mathematical history to fair voting, the output of which is super not in use, and of which I do find plenty of the alternative systems more representative:
https://youtu.be/qf7ws2DF-zk
I do think regular variety elections are generally representative though. I just also see value in keeping these asterisks in mind.
Trump's exceptional, isn't he? He explicitly only governs for his base, and he's explicitly against those outside his base. Sure, he won a slim majority, but it's understood that democratically elected rulers govern all their citizens, if only to prevent electoral violence.
> Don’t say US. They don’t speak for us all. Only 49.8% of voters.
E pluribus unum
Out of many one. Look up the definition of "fasces." I love that it's literally a US symbol.
https://academic.oup.com/book/44680/chapter-abstract/3787689...
People who didn't vote voted for the winning party. That's true in every election.
Everyone who sat out the 2016 and 2024 elections is responsible for this clown getting into office.
*Democracy is not a spectator sport*. You don't get to complain about corrupt politicians and then go on to make excuses about why you can't vote. You're wasting your citizenship. Either go vote or move to a dictatorship where voting isn't a concern.
> One species of Gulf whale is particularly vulnerable. Scientists estimate that only about 51 Rice's whales are left on Earth, all of them in waters of the Gulf of Mexico, which the Trump administration has termed the Gulf of America.
I don't think the animals that may go extinct care about the distinction.
But we all do, and will impact us all directly or indirectly.
I mean, I didn't vote for Trump, but I think it should be the US. This administration represents us on the global stage. You may not like it, and it may not feel fair, but we will all have to bear the consequences of their actions. Every day something like this happens--and is allowed to happen--is an embarrassment to all of us.
Agreed.
I voted against Trump 3 times. But people outside of the US should definitely act as if they cannot trust the US. Because they can't. I mean ffs we collectively elected him twice.
This is a good point. Instead of saying “The US” they should make up a number <50% and put that in the headline. That way it would be confusing and patently untrue
In current circumstances, this is a smart move.
No. It is like a drug addict doubling down in its obsession.
Oil is in the way out. Only countries addicted to oil don't see that. And the Americans are addicted to oil.
"Definitive of what capitalism is, this separation severely limits the scope of the political. Devolving vast aspects of social life to the rule of “the market” (in reality, to large corporations), it declares them off-limits to democratic decision-making, collective action, and public control. Its very structure, therefore, deprives us of the ability to decide collectively exactly what and how much we want to produce, on what energic basis and through what kinds of social relations. It deprives us, too, of the capacity to determine how we want to use the social surplus we collectively produce; how we want to relate to nature and to future generations; how we want to organize the work of social reproduction and its relation to that of production. Capitalism, in sum, is fundamentally anti-democratic. Even in the best-case scenario, democracy in a capitalist society must perforce be limited and weak."
https://www.wcfia.harvard.edu/publications/centerpiece/fall2...
There are very few purely capitalistic countries. All countries that I can think of use taxes and regulations to influence market equilibrium. „letting the market figure it out“ is usually the political expression for „I like the current state better than what the opposition proposed“.
Do you really want to see votes on "exactly what and how much we want to produce" at each factory? Or what farmers plant?
Yeah imagine an economic system where farmers can’t even plant the seeds produced by the crops that they grow every year
I'm in a massive grain belt ATM, as a sign of the times I can't place whether that's a reference to GM crops or the immediate issue of fuel and fertilizer.
Fascism is the logical fallback to protect wealth from redistribution.
Capitalism (in the libertarian sense of the word) makes these "vast aspects of social life" off-limits to democratic deliberation in the same way it does for unrelated private corporations: without authorization from the rightful owners, it is supposed to be illegal (not to say that has stopped either).
She uses terms like "us", "we", "collective", but who are these? All the constituents, the people, in their totality, they are not, for people are not a homogeneous mass. In practice, it, along with democracy, just becomes a nice rhetoric device for stripping people of their rights.
Democracy was never really a good solution to an inclusive society-wide governance system. Most successful implementation even need to add limits to it to prevent the mob rule that's a feature to it. Some try to pretend it is anti-authoritarian, because the members get a vote. But that vote only matters when the voter is part of a majority. If they aren't, they might as well not even have it. That alone already creates a hierarchy. And it only gets worse: most people belong to minority of sorts, and they, by design, get alienated. This means that the doesn't really represent anyone... other than itself, very much like a corporation.
Which leads to the final point: capitalism (in the Marxist sense of the word) isn't antidemocratic. Democracy isn't in opposition to corporatocrocy, it requires a corporation large enough to own everything. Thus, dare I say, the democracy she seems to envision might as well be one of the forms of ultra peak capitalism.
And that’s why capitalists have been fundamental actors to bring XX AND XXI century fascism - it happened with Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, innumerable less prominent fascists in LatAm, and now the with the obscene caricature that is Trump and the uber rich to do their bidding.
The fascism of Europe in in the 1930s was EXPLICITLY anti-capitalist. You can read tons of statements by various prominent fascists about how capitalism was the tool of the British empire and "globalists"(they often used a different word). They viewed it as separating the people from the land. Capitalists were not in any way fundamental to the rise of Nazism.
If you're on about Pinochet, he only embraced market reforms 3 years after coming to power and came to power directly by a military coup. Business leaders had basically nothing to do with it.
Trump is also often anti capitalist, between tariffs and government shares in business. There is what fascists say and what they do, and industrialists were often very good Nazis.