Racism generally means treating one race different than another based on imagined differences between them. I can't find a direct connection between the emission of greenhouse gases and the treating blacks as inferior.
That's because they aren't calling global warming or greenhouse gases racist. My understanding garnered from that article is that they are calling the fact that they are "relegated" to ghettos close to polluting factories, they are being discriminated against.
I'm Chinese. I have family in China and I completely disagree. All of my Indian friends are also the top in our classes. MIT and other Ivy League schools are filled with Asians and Indians. The Asians who immigrate to the US are moving here for the education and a better opportunity. The Asian immigrants work their asses off for their kids to have a better life. The majority of them are somewhat rich and have been really arrogant, but my family and many others came here with almost nothing and look where we are now.
I could be mistaken... But I think he was saying that in sarcasm... At least, that's the way it sounded in my head.
You didn't say it was your point, but in order for it to be racism it would have to true or something close to it would have to be true wouldn't it?
OhI only responded because someone brought your post to my attention.
Is it wrong though, sorry this is completely off topic, but, there were once, not so long ago in America's past, laws and policies that kept black people, well, really anyone not white, from buying homes in certain areas. This forced people not white to buy in areas that had trouble infrastructure, next to large industrial sites, etc. Basically, the area's white people deemed subgrade. Most black people "moved here" long before affirmative action. That's not necessarily the case of many other hyphen Americans.
Of course it is - anyone with a basic grasp of physics knows that darker objects absorb more heat, ergo white people are not bearing their fair share of the increased heat energy burden due to global climate change. Indeed, some people - particularly in the Aberdeenshire region of Scotland - are so white that they are being actively encouraged by climate change activists to sunbathe naked in order to increase the 'albedo effect' - or as it is known in Scotland, the 'Aberdeen-o effect'. Unfortunately, just as the burkini issue has caused trouble in France (where French gendarmes have been witnessed forcing Muslim sunbathers to undress on the beaches of Nice), the sight of naked, milk-bottle white Aberdonians is causing scuffles, with police being forced to intervene in certain cases to force people to put their clothes and burkinis back on. Ironically, Aberdeen (in the north east of Scotland) is one of the few places in the world where global warming is sorely needed - but, alas, not at the expense of common decency. The potential rise in tourist numbers in Aberdeen due to a slightly warmer climate (i.e. rain instead of snow) is more than offset by the numbers of tourists abandoning the region in their droves due to the increased threat of witnessing an Aberdonian woman in the nude.
I will certainly come back with some citations on what I'm getting at, but yes, it would certainly have been during the Jim Crow era. I'd also point out that the troubles that Japanese Americans happened to have were done after WWII for the most part. As to how they melded back into society better than blacks, I'm thinking that is a many faceted issue. I do not think they had/have quite as much inner conflict amongst their own, nor did they have continued governement interference in their daily lives. I mean I don't believe that Japanese Americans had the CIA pushing crack in their neighborhoods. While I certainly cannot argue that apathy is likely a reason a number of poor people stay poor, I do not believe it is the only reason, or that it applies to every poor person. That completely ignores real social issues, family problems, access to education and the alike that also can play a part.
The sources are cited in the comic margin. IPCC and HadCRUT4 data (for the most recent temperatures, I assume).
There wasn't zero rise from 2000-2014. If you're counting from 1998, yes, the rise was minimal, but that's only because of the massive temperature spike due to the unprecedented El Niño of that year. 2000 was a relatively cold year in relation. I guess the problem is that he simply connected the dots from 2000-2015 with a straight line instead of a more accurately wiggly one.
It's also hard to tell if the rise he shows is 0.4 or 0.3 or 0.25... the danger, I guess, of trying to plot data with a (virtual) felt-tip marker. Either way, though, it's roughly accurate... though the "current path" projection is contentious.
