I didn’t think in black and white categories and I won’t start doing so. I think in terms of CO2 and methane.

The motivation change might come from a) situation like sleep, nutrition, noise, concentration b) psychichal disease/illness c) your personality

It could be depression, psychosis, ADS but also a “scanner personality” etc. For mental health only a psychiatrist is competent. For personality a psychologist (or maybe a therapeut). For general health (body) and situation you yourself are the person which is responsible.

And yes, I have that, too. My personal solution (not neccessarily the right one for you) is to carefully select a few projects and concentrate on them. How this helps? It prevents me from hopping from one thing to the other.

Try cycling the exam topics for a change/versality.

One more comment: If you aren’t able to concentrate or focus on the exams then get professional help soon!

Yeah. Sad but true. (Empty) promises… and no actions!

We have a relatively new government in USA and since a few weeks in Germany. Let’s see if there will be something else than blah-blah crap (like “Net zero in 2050”).

Yes we disagree on what democracy is.

“and that is accountable to the majority. The second part is very important,” Then at least we a agree on that. Your former posting gave me the impression you don’t think so.

Just one thing: Having just one party is a mock democracy.

Wow I fear in Germany we don’t have that rate of concern. But I don’t know.

I watched the viseos/texts. Sorry but I disagree.

Doing what’s good for the majority is another word for a benevolent dictator.

And “the majority thinks it’s a democracy” is not the same as a democracy. Democracy is well-defined. It envolves separation of power, more than one party, freedom of press etc.

You fail to understand that democracy is a method, a structure. You seem to think democracy is an opinion/decret/result.

Selection and election means undemocratically preventing free votes.

And very high rates of popularity lets me question the presence of a democratic process. Because democracy means arguing heavily. But some Chinese seem to prefer denying disagreement.

So you can tell a million times “We/they are democratic” but still fail. Declaring a goat as a cow is wrong even if millions of people tell so.

I favorize democratic socialism. And I admit that China does some things right. I just refuse to call a government democratic that (for example) forbids the word Tiannanmen Square. As a German I know well about fake democracy.

But thanks for the links. I will thoroughly check them. Maybe indeed that I learn something new.

Yes there is a well-defined term of democracy and China is definitely not democratic. But every dictator calls himself a democrat because what he does is such a gift for humanity. In that sense China is similar to Trump and Putin.

What makes the Western system so bad is corruption, sometimes called lobbyism.

Yes I’m pessimistic on that, too. But I feel uncomfortable with the conclusion: which is that dictatorship is the solution! Note that a democratic socialistic or communistic country will fail exactly like a capitalistic one.

(We currently have a new minister of econonomics in Germany, from the Green Party. He says we need more speed in climate-protection. We will say where that leads…)

I agree on your analyze of capitalism.

But I think people don’t need to participate but instead have choices even within the capitalistic system. They can have a small CO2 footprint.

But the problem stays present: How to convince large amounts of (normal) people? Or politicians?

Wow this is a great video. But what is to do? How to convince the politicians, the voters and the consumers?

It is certainly an unpleasant experience to be at a meeting being hacked like this.

But more interesting is palm oil. I wasn’t aware that it can be a threat to forests.

Palm oil and forests is another “material” that needs to be controlled by the government imho. The market can’t provide protection of the forests. And it shows that a lot of money (and perhaps know-how) must be transferred from the rich countries to the poor ones (or else people will destroy the environment just to survive!)

(EDIT: I also doubt that anarchism can protect the climate and the forests. But thats just a side note…)

I get an error: 403 Forbidden.

lecturing them about reducing CO2 – which is not only unjust but useless.

I don’t think it’s useless.

The rich countries – the colonisers who are responsible the most for this calamity – must pay the cost of global warming, reduce their production and fix the inequality of resources and income they created that is crippling the world.

That would be nice. But it would not protect the climate!

Of course China had less emissions than Europe in the past. But I don’t understand how/why this could be helpful for protecting the climate?

This text turns out to be an extensive list of attitudes towards climate change/crisis.

I recommend reading it, no matter what your opinion is about the subject.