The solution is obviously not exclusively from pricing models, we need other energy sources than renewables for the time being, that doesn’t mean we need to have market-based electricity pricing.

Imagine the state installing as many solar panels as society, guided by experts, democratically decides it wants, basically deciding as a society the energy mix instead of hoping that companies will install enough if we bribe them enough with taxes to do so, and if it’s profitable. Then, it decides a pricing model based on a mixture of subsidy and incentivising consumption during production hours.

Problem solved, innit?

Do I really need to explain the concepts of taxes, subsidies, or fixed prices regardless of demand, to an adult?

Cheap electricity is great for consumers, but not necessarily for producers. Some people might say, “well, screw producers,” but even if you take profit out of the equation, electric utilities need to be able to at least cover their expenses, and you can’t do that if the amount of electricity you’re generating relative to the demand is so high the price actually goes negative (meaning the utility is actually paying the consumer). Again, that’s good for consumers, but I’m sure you can see how that’s not a sustainable business model.

Fully agreed: let’s eliminate business from the issue, and create national, for-service electric grids, that produce the cheapest renewables at all possible times in the most efficient way possible, disregarding hourly profit and taking into account exclusively the cost in €/kWh produced over the lifetime of each energy source.

Suddenly it’s obvious that the problem isn’t with renewables, but with organising the electric grid as a market

abundance of electricity when people need it the least

Isn’t peak consumption around middle of the day for most countries?

it’s not economical

Mfw electricity being cheap to generate is not economical

Everyone’s got a few Nazis, but Ukraine’s problem with Nazism is far more generalized nowadays than in most places, as a consequence of the invasion. It’s not just the Azov battalion, as I said the literal defense ministry tweets Nazi symbolism on the regular.

In fact, the rise of right wing extremism in Europe can be seen to be heavily influenced by the past 15 years of economic stagnation. Your point of “everyone’s got a few Nazis” clearly points towards a radicalisation towards the far-right in places as the situation worsens. We see that in the US as well, with Trump quite literally having project 2025, and Kamala supporting Zionist genocide.

Now that everyone’s stopped trying to fix Afghanistan and they’re now fully autonomous, the Taliban are getting increasingly misogynistic

That’s not what’s happening. Taliban have always been misogynistic, they just weren’t in full control of the country. If you want to compare nearby countries with a Muslim majority that didn’t go through such a phase, you can look at Uzbekistan for example, which while not the most progressive country on earth (again, due to the level of development), the continued development and stability within the USSR led to much more progressivism than nearby countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan (which were seriously damaged by western influence). Afghanistan, btw, could have been another socialist country with a comparable quality of life to that of Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan, but the US just HAD TO arm radical militias who, surprise surprise, would turn into the Taliban.

Your logic would suggest they should be heading in the opposite direction

If Afghanistan significantly develops materially over the following decades, I DO expect to see that, btw. It’s just that Afghanistan is absolutely destroyed as a consequence of western policy.

You’re really trying to decouple the level of societal development to the level of economic progress and to the recent history of the countries, in a sort of racist view that the west is superior just because it’s superior, not because of the material and historical conditions.

Are you serious? Have you ever heard of the literal Nazi Azov battalion? The invasion of Ukraine is generating insane reactionary tendencies. The minister of Ukraine posted pictures on twitter that included slightly modified emblems of SS corps, and it’s very frequent to see soldiers in Ukraine with Nazi tattoos. That’s not to say anything positive about the invasion, on the contrary, it’s normal that such nationalist radical sentiments are stoked in extreme cases

Contemporary, socially progressive ideology (feminism, anti-racism, queer…) is the consequence not of some “western superior ideology”, it’s mostly a consequence of progress, both societal and economical. Without the societal and economical part of it, you simply don’t have the conditions for it. By bombing nations into ashes, you’re preventing them from the possibility of arriving to these conclusions by themselves.

In the 50s, there was a movement in Iran that led to a democratically elected, progressive, secular president (Mosaddegh). Failing to maintain the exploitation of oil at low prices by the British Petroleum against the interests of the Irani, the country was embargoed and covert intelligence operations by western countries destabilised it and kicked him out of government (mainly through enforcing poverty and discontent on the population), so that they could put in place a king who would uphold the interests of Britain and the US.

In Egypt, not much later than that, president Nasser was giving speeches about how ridiculous the idea of legally forcing every woman to cover their head with a veil was.

There have been plenty of progressive, secular, truly forward periods in the history of north Africa and the near East. The fact that right now in many countries destroyed by western influence they don’t have such movements anymore, has much more to do with western influence than with anything else.

So please, explain me, what is the logic flaw in my argument.

I’m not advocating for pushing it over the brink (Trump), I’m advocating for conditioning the vote to an end to genocide (seems reasonable to me). If you think that doesn’t work, the logical desired consequence for me is the destruction of the state upholding genocide.

“America, despite being on the brink of fascism and its political alternative still being genocidal, is the bulwark of freedom and equality. Never mind the history of subversion, coups, and literal war against democratically elected governments all over the world, and our support of monarchic, fascist, and literally genocidal regimes. Anyone who wants the US to stop doing these things is part of a counter-intelligence program”

American exceptionalism is one HELL of a drug

Ok, that’s really good insight, so it boils down to France not respecting the 1935 treaty by refusing to declare Czechoslovakia as a victim of aggression?

As a Spanish, I can relate too well (sadly) to the part where the president of Czechoslovakia says “I did not dare to fight with Russian aid alone, because I knew that the British and French Governments would make out of my country another Spain”, I assume they’re talking of how the Soviet Union was the only country to sell weapons to Republican Spain in their fight against fascism, even as the Nazis and Italian Fascists were militarily and economically helping the reactionaries in Spain, and how France and England didn’t do anything under the guise of “non-interventionism”.

We can’t possibly stop the Democratic candidate for president from supporting genocide

I believe America is the greatest force for freedom and equality in the world

Ok, I’m sorry, I can’t even keep a straight face at that. I hope you’ll reflect a bit. Have a good day, rofl

“a month before the election”

The escalation in Gaza by Israel is one year ago, we’ve been saying this for a year…

So basically your whole argument is “we can’t possibly stop the democrats from supporting a genocide, it’s as physically impossible as making a home run with a pool noodle”. If the American system is truly so fucked up, then you must agree with the following: Death to America as a country.

Do you agree?

“everyone who doesn’t vote for Harris during an ongoing genocide under her administration as vice-president is either a trump supporter or a Russian bot”

God, you guys are pathetic. You asked for a solution, I gave you one, you just don’t wanna listen, you’re truly Blue MAGA

Again, you’re telling me that the material and historical conditions of the invaded countries of Levant, aren’t relevant to the ideology in said countries, and the spread of radical variants of given religions?

Because I know that won’t work

You don’t see the irony of replying that after basically saying “the only thing stopping your vote from mattering is not believing in it”?

acting like a petulant, naive child

Sorry that you’re discomforted by my protest against genocide

who would you rather protest under

You’re literally under democrat government, so I hope that you’re saying this while organising and attending protest. How about, hear me out, protesting with your vote as I explained

Ok, just to get your analogy, you’re telling me that the ideology of people in occupied territories of the Levant is not influenced by the material and historical conditions of the past century?

If every vote counts, then withhold your Kamala vote on the condition that they will stop a genocide. Parties pay attention to vote totals and where they’re winning and losing and what issues are connecting to voters. It’s only true that you can’t change the genocidal nature of Democrat’s if you believe it.

Even if you don’t think you’re going to stop them from committing genocide, you should still uphold that moral point and condition your vote on it

You should be conditioning your vote to Harris to the Dems stopping the genocide. If you think the USA is a democratic country, then a critical mass of anti-genocide voters should be enough to sway Kamala out of supporting genocide. If you don’t believe so, then you’re essentially saying that the two-party system is completely undemocratic, and you should start organising against it immediately.

Oh yeah, police in China is so heavily militarized, that’s why they murder so many people every year… Wait, why are there more than twice as many cops per capita in the US? Why is police violence so much more prevalent in the US than in China? Oh, nvm, I got it wrong