Only disasters shift societies meaningfully. When Hitler was mobilising in the 1930s, the world mobilised at…

Only disasters shift societies meaningfully. When Hitler was mobilising in the 1930s, the world mobilised at emergency levels to oppose him. Climate change is a much, much bigger problem than Hitler. Why we need the Chinese right now. /1 https://t.co/bDoR7q1AdT https://t.co/8asYfA0L5D

Chinese car makers are beginning to flood Western countries with cheap and high-quality EVs. This is causing enormous angst, particularly in countries with existing ICE vehicle industries. But also others that get their current vehicles from these countries. /2

China has a glut of EVs, after years of heavy government incentives and subsidies to build the industry there. Away from the vested interests of existing carmakers, this is a tremendous opportunity for the world. Part of the disruption we need. /3

The status quo is making clear that it’s doing what status quos always do. Nothing. It will resist every shift. This is how history always works. The status quo will need to be swept away, it will never change of its own will. /4 https://t.co/j5Fn2tJ2qK https://t.co/rG7YoTyVZm

It will try to ‘gradual our way to climate action. The Neville Chamberlain approach, appeasement with the enemy. We know how that worked out. Some hilariously say this is a ridiculous analogy, that it’s not the same level of threat. /5 https://t.co/k7VNrff5HT

And that’s true. The Third Reich is like a pimple on the arse of the threat climate change poses. Climate change could end humanity. Extinction. Nazis and all. So we need drastic action. We can wait for the catastrophes, or we can disrupt the status quo now. /6

And really disrupt it. Smash it to pieces. It will NOT shift on its own. All the talk of ‘balance’ in our approach is bullshit weasel words. It means do nothing. Appease every vested interest that’s part of the status quo. /7

The only option we have right now that isn’t just waiting for absolutely catastrophic climate change to force our hand, is probably the Chinese. Their leviathan renewables and EV industries. They need to smash our status quo industries, in these areas. /8

Would that create enormous disruption and pain? You bet. But that’s what we need. Nothing else will shift societies. Politics as we conceive it is in la-la land with human psychology. The Industrial Revolution in 1760 wasn’t ‘balanced’ change. /9

It smashed existing arrangements. We have no conception at all in public narratives of either the magnitude of the emergency we’re in the middle of, nor the magnitude of the disruption needed to survive it. It was called a ‘revolution’ for a reason. /10 https://t.co/Zy0s8kwIVi

@EdConwaySky talks about this in his work on the materiality of our societies. How a total revolution is required, and we’re not seeing just how disruptive that will need to be. Only one nation has launched any sort of industrial revolution in our time. China. /11

Nobody should care that they’re communist. They’ve already done the heavy lifting on renewables and EVs. We desperately need to use their capacity. And that sounds like a nice ‘balanced’ process again. It won’t be that. It will be a disaster for our status quos. Good. /end