Well, before it was totally unimportant but now that a British Newspaper (i.e. from the nation in Europe with the most “opinion forming” - aka propagandistic - press) published an article were a “young danish climate activist” said it, it’s suddenly important. /s
Mind you, I’m not attacking nuclear or saying that it shouldn’t be part of the future energy mix in Europe, I’m just a little fed up with the overuse of this kind of theatrical spin in opinion articles by newspapers which are very open about their objective being to “form opinion”.
I actually think this relentless use of the slease-sale rather than actual well argumented logical analyses that looks at pros & cons plus risks & opportunities is actually damaging the cause of nuclear, or in fact any cause these types take up, as the slease-sale is often associated with them having some kind profit interest for somebody: The Guardian is a center-right neoliberal mouthpiece that only seems “left” in the UK context because British politics has an overtoon window moved so far to the right that the government is very openly ultra-nationalist and anti-immigrant, and almost all of The Guardian’s writers and editors hail from the British Middle-Class.
The UK has quite the history of doing the wrong kind of nuclear power plants with massive delays and cost overruns, and those white elefant projects are always outsourced to the private, so demands for nuclear from British high-middle-class “opinion makers” as sadly manipulative “selling the book” and hypocrisy is pretty standard in the upper classes over there.
What The Guardian is, is a neoliberal mouthpiece which mostly reflects the viewpoint of a certain english high-middle class who grew up in priviledge, went to expensive private schools (curiously called “public schools” in the UK) and who are amongst the “winners” of the last 4 decades of Neoliberalism and who, of course, care mostly that the gravy train keeps chugging along.
Absolutelly, they’re as worried about global warming as all other highly educated types in the West (which in most other countries include way more people from working class origins than in the UK), it’s just that they’re even more worried about the performance of their investments (being amongst the top 10% wealthwise in Britain), keeping their priviledge and passing their priviledge on to their children, which is why for example they’re totally unable to suggest that something like building nuclear power stations is done by the public sector and will always defend massive private projects instead and do so with no analysis as if it’s self-evidently the only reasonable option.
You’re not going to get unbiased hard-nosed analysis from these types and since the English upper classes - from where they hail - are culturally particularly hypocrite in European terms, you’re not even going to get straight talking honesty.
Well, before it was totally unimportant but now that a British Newspaper (i.e. from the nation in Europe with the most “opinion forming” - aka propagandistic - press) published an article were a “young danish climate activist” said it, it’s suddenly important. /s
Mind you, I’m not attacking nuclear or saying that it shouldn’t be part of the future energy mix in Europe, I’m just a little fed up with the overuse of this kind of theatrical spin in opinion articles by newspapers which are very open about their objective being to “form opinion”.
I actually think this relentless use of the slease-sale rather than actual well argumented logical analyses that looks at pros & cons plus risks & opportunities is actually damaging the cause of nuclear, or in fact any cause these types take up, as the slease-sale is often associated with them having some kind profit interest for somebody: The Guardian is a center-right neoliberal mouthpiece that only seems “left” in the UK context because British politics has an overtoon window moved so far to the right that the government is very openly ultra-nationalist and anti-immigrant, and almost all of The Guardian’s writers and editors hail from the British Middle-Class.
The UK has quite the history of doing the wrong kind of nuclear power plants with massive delays and cost overruns, and those white elefant projects are always outsourced to the private, so demands for nuclear from British high-middle-class “opinion makers” as sadly manipulative “selling the book” and hypocrisy is pretty standard in the upper classes over there.
The guardian isnt populist
That is correct.
What The Guardian is, is a neoliberal mouthpiece which mostly reflects the viewpoint of a certain english high-middle class who grew up in priviledge, went to expensive private schools (curiously called “public schools” in the UK) and who are amongst the “winners” of the last 4 decades of Neoliberalism and who, of course, care mostly that the gravy train keeps chugging along.
Absolutelly, they’re as worried about global warming as all other highly educated types in the West (which in most other countries include way more people from working class origins than in the UK), it’s just that they’re even more worried about the performance of their investments (being amongst the top 10% wealthwise in Britain), keeping their priviledge and passing their priviledge on to their children, which is why for example they’re totally unable to suggest that something like building nuclear power stations is done by the public sector and will always defend massive private projects instead and do so with no analysis as if it’s self-evidently the only reasonable option.
You’re not going to get unbiased hard-nosed analysis from these types and since the English upper classes - from where they hail - are culturally particularly hypocrite in European terms, you’re not even going to get straight talking honesty.