Unable to load image

"What about the nuclear" rightoid dunked: a template for shutting these r-slurs down

https://rdrama.net/post/54628/ice-cold/1603734?context=8#context

This entire argument is a framework for beating the shit out of this brand of rightoid.

7
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You don't actually understand what the argument was over.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I went off the post title, and if its a bad post title that's not my problem

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

"What about the nuclear" is a performative argument rightoids make that suggests "the liberals" are why we don't build new plants.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I agree that argument is dumb because both republicans and democrats are beholden to the same corpoate interests, in this case fossil fuel companies

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Ya nobody disagrees, my only point is republicans are not pro nuclear and the only reason they invoke it is to pretend it's actually the liberals holding nuclear back.

Republican policy around nuclear is actually more hostile to nuclear energy.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As a demographic Republican voters have been historically been less hostile towards nuclear energy. Even as recent as 2019:

![](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5tij1tpSRyxCeMl-6H8tg7m3H70=/0x0:1081x979/920x0/filters:focal(0x0:1081x979):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/16184383/NUCLEAR.jpg)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Pizza has been btfo so many times, I lost count.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What was I wrong about?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Republican voters but republican policy is more hostile, just not in a direct way.

Whatever this r-slur salad was supposed to mean.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Republican voters but republican policy is more hostile, just not in a direct way.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It doesn't get any real support from either party, but the Democratic party has historically opposed nuclear energy, including cancelling the breeder program. They've only recently changed position on it in the last two years.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Republicans are more hostile in that cheap gas/other fossil fuels are the primary threat to nuclear energy.

Like I also disagree with the few years thing.

https://insidesources.com/candidates-should-heed-obama-clinton-on-nuclear-power/

https://www.energy.gov/articles/obama-administration-announces-450-million-design-and-commercialize-us-small-modular

I'm not saying either party is fully pro nuclear, but the clinton/obama wing has been pretty pro nuclear for a while.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Read that sentence back to yourself and try to come back with something actually coherent.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Read the comment it's responding to and then realize you're illiterate

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Outside of even repub policy the only reason rightoids give a shit about nuclear is cuz they think its a way to act like theyre above leftoids when it comes to renewables. If their dreams of no more green energy came to pass theyd double down on how great oil is rather than ever suggest build a new nuke plant.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

No, for a lot of people it's because intermittent renewables suck butt and nuclear energy actually works. France built out a huge reactor fleet for energy independence in the late 70's. They didn't even care about air pollution or CO2. Germany built out wind & solar to 'go green' and their grid is super expensive, they're dependent on Russian gas to back it up, and their average emissions are still super high.

https://app.electricitymap.org/map

Germany's doing surprisingly well today.

The only countries that are even remotely low in lifecycle CO2 emissions are countries with a shitload of hydro and/or nuclear. (Or Iceland w/ geothermal, or a couple countries with a shitload of hydro that can use it as a massive battery w/ some wind or solar in geographically ideal locations).

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.