Do We Even Need Fossil Fuels? Jon w/ Kendra Pierre-Louis | The Problem With Jon Stewart Podcast

[@greglinder5784]

Kendra Pierre-Louis is one of the most aware commentators I've ever seen on this topic, and I appreciate Jon giving such an amazing woman an audience to discuss real world approaches and truths related to these serious issues.

[@VeganAtheistWeirdo]

Just listening to her, I feel like I'm able to breathe deeper. She sees past the cynicism to what should have been obvious.

[@Horus070]

Indeed! I really enjoyed listen to points of views!

[@julianwarmington1267]

She mentioned subsidies: i'm an instant fan for life.

[@mg-Q17]

Democrats are frauds and everyone knows it. All of the Dems have been proven liars for years. Time to expose that they traffick children. They're going to own it.

[@TROBassGuitar]

@@mg-Q17 hilarious considering Republicans keep getting caught up in human trafficking and relations with minors

[@ucantSQ]

Thanks for having her. She was brilliant.

[@crowemagnum1337]

It's nice to see "push back" evolve to better points, as opposed to devolving into reductive nonsense.

[@TheMosayat]

Very well said! I was wondering why I enjoyed the "arguments" this time unlike in other interviews/debates, and that is the reason.

[@Paddyo875]

It sometimes seems like because Jon is has been comedian for most of his life and he’s very sharp, he resorts to a reductive, humorous comment when he is speaking with people like that Shell executive that most of us don’t see as “one of the good guys.” Whereas many will see Kendra as an ally, Jon had an interesting conversation with her. Not to be reductive myself, but it’s analogous to late night show host VS podcast host. The better of the latter group develop informative, insightful conversations. Yet Jon sometimes reverts to the former when he’s talking with a person in power that’s likely part of the problem being discussed.

[@felixborges7440]

Jon’s always been this way though even back when he did interviews on the daily show. It’s not that late night shows can’t have a conversation like this one is just that reductive arguments and flippant comebacks make for more “dynamic” and “engaging” TV. Or at least that’s what the networks seem to think. We can only hope that Jon’s example starts to change the current paradigm of late night tv discourse

[@danelmore6553]

@@felixborges7440 It would be nice, but it won't happen. Major print and TV publications were saying Jon had redefined the landscape of "late night TV", and news programs, twenty years ago. Clearly, it wasn't true, because both have moved in the opposite direction, at and exponentially increasing rate, over the last 5-10 years. Take Colbert for example - He certainly understands nuance, and has the awareness and capacity to have genuine discussions and more nuanced perspectives, if he so chose. Yet, like almost all other major media, he has leaned fully into pandering to the lowest resolution ideologies. Even the comedy has suffered greatly, because he plays for applause rather than laughter.

[@felixborges7440]

Well if the end goal we’re seeking is to see a complete 180 from the current state of the news and information media then no it’s not gonna happen. But I think that just getting people to understand how the news is fundamentally broken as Jon has done is enough. The truth is that he or anyone else can come along and say all these things and point all these issues out but ultimately it’s up to us to be discerning enough to demand a more nuanced and fuller understanding of the world around us. The media will only ever reflect back to us what we as a culture chose to value and as long as we chose to be entertained rather than informed we will get the kind of media that reflect just that.. we’ve done this to ourselves

[@biodiesel16]

This is one of the best discussions I've seen about the state of the state and the environment in a while. Kudos to Jon and Kendra. Kendra stays eloquently on point. Kudos.

[@sharkracer]

Wow.. I'm usually too jaded to really be surprised by anything said in these types of podcasts, but that thing she said about why does public transport always have to make money when roads do not... that really was a lightbulb moment.

[@timekiajf]

Agree

[@growthisfreedomunitedearth7584]

this one is a smart cookie.

[@releasethebogus8581]

​@M W What are you talking about? Public-private enterprises have nothing to do with what OP's saying. The point that OP is making is that roads are viewed as something that should be paid for by the government, whereas public transport is viewed as something that must pay for itself. That is a double-standard. Besides, I don't see how your conclusion follows from what you were discussing. You say at the end: "You'd have less infrastructure, massive decay and upkeep costs and taxes so high you couldn't sustain them." I think you've got unstated assumptions in there, namely: 1. that state-owned enterprises are inherently not cost-effective, 2. that state-owned enterprises inherently can't maintain infrastructure, and 3. that state-owned enterprises are inherently limited in how much infrastructure they can support. Those assumptions are something you have to prove, not something you can simply assert.

[@DavidTSmith-jn5bs]

@@releasethebogus8581 I can give you an example of state-owned enterprises not being cost-effective and are extremely limited in how much infrastructure they can support: The NJ Turnpike. I tell my friends that it's the only portion of Interstate 95 that drivers have to pay money in order to use. I could add that there are several bridges and expressways that are in the same boat but that only adds to my point that not all roadways are being paid for by taxpayer money. Interesting discussion but Ms. Pierre-Louis came off to me as a wide-eyed idealist who sees US bigotry and isolationism as an excuse for our problems instead of good old fashioned laziness and xenophobia on the part of the average American.

[@releasethebogus8581]

@@DavidTSmith-jn5bs To clarify, are you referring to the NJ Turnpike as a positive example, or a negative example? I live in Australia, so I've never used it.

[@CooChewGames]

It is so refreshing to hear a discussion with two intelligent, knowledgable people willing to learn from the other and willing to put across alternatives and explain their perspective. Thanks for this video.

[@curiouscat3384]

yes yes yes!

[@littlestbroccoli]

Omg she's insanely knowledgeable, and sounds like she just has these bits and pieces always at the ready. Very interesting, broad and comprehensive conversation. Makes me want to talk with people I know about this more, not just online.

[@toleyk]

This was a pretty complex discussion. I especially like the points made about the uniqueness of American culture that suppress collective action and our tenacy to project our biggest faults on humanity as a whole. Really amazing!

[@robertnicholls9917]

There is a great book about humanity called The Dawn Of Everything - A New History Of Humanity by David Graeber and David Wengrow

[@chrisguevara]

It's the bad side of individualism.

[@aoeu256]

Why don't people look at how China and Vietnam and Japan build their cities for scooters or ebikes rather than cars, or how instead of using air conditioning they use "localized" heating/cooling like the kotatsu. We should build new cities in unused land based on ebikes where everything is close together and people have ear plugs that selective get rid of noise.

[@marthak1618]

WEIRD: Western Educated Industrialized Rich Developed countries. That is going to stick with me.

[@Noumenon4Idolatry]

I’ve noticed that people who desire for collective action desire being dependent on government systems to take care of them. In rural communities you take care of your self because there are near zero support systems. I can see why collectivism would make sense in some urban areas. Public Transport is a nice idea until you notice that people don’t take very good care of things that don’t belong to them personally. People trash public transportation and it smells like a mixture between an armpit and vomit. American culture doesn’t only exist on the same 3 city blocks some people were born on and never left. If you look at the majority of the US it is not densely populated. Another problem with being dependent upon government systems to care for you is politicians tend to make promises they don’t keep and say whatever they need to say in order to get voted. You can blame American culture but really if you put your self into a place of dependency upon a government system to take care of you then there is a good chance you will be exploited used and destroyed for the political and financial gain of politicians, government, and private corporate interests.

[@selispeks]

I love this episode. Y'all didn't agree half the time, but stayed respectful and [mostly] listened to each other. So great!

[@aceous99]

they agreed mostly, just Jon didn't think we're capable of doing it.

[@lyraserpentine894]

I LOVED this episode. I also love that we can have people with somewhat opposing viewpoints debate and NOT have feelings hurt. I miss this. Thank you!

[@jaymesdevine7737]

Civil discussion with disagreement. Excellent. I learned a lot. Thanks.

[@JC_inc]

Jon & Kendra agree with each other. There’s no disagreement here.

[@patreekotime4578]

@@JC_inc did you watch the entire video?

[@gherieg.1091]

Why wasn’t this done with Covid ? Who prohibited it ? Why ?

[@patreekotime4578]

@@gherieg.1091 Because "I aint wearing no face diaper" isnt civil discourse.

[@gherieg.1091]

@@patreekotime4578 That’s all that was said in opposition of Fauci tyranny ? Are you serious ?

[@peteyC]

This person is SMART! I'm loving the series of discussions on climate issues. Kendra Pierre-Louis, David Wallace Wells, really informed, intelligent, impassioned conversations. I usually resonate with the cynicism that Jon displays on these issues, but she challenged that perception very strongly.

[@nicholasdyee]

Wow really cool to run into you here Peter! And yes, Kendra really moved this conversation forward in important ways that can hopefully get us out of this rut. And I was surprised at how defensive Jon was getting about the American ethos at the end despite all of his self-derogatory talk about it (usually as jokes though)

[@robertnicholls9917]

@@nicholasdyee Yes, Jon always tries to hide that he has a rigid ideology based on belief not anything factual. He maintains ideas that are not true. There are many people he can have on to challenge his assertion that mankind has always been violent and exploitative. The data proves that's not true. It's always the same people (a very small group) causing all the suffering. The majority of us are very cooperative and peaceful. Only 2% of the world are psychopaths and not all psychopaths embrace their desire to exploit humanity or commit violence because they're trying to fit in. They basically fake being normal. It's that less than 2% who manipulates the situation.

[@alisonadams4979]

Omg so defensive!! 🙄

[@adidas2684]

@@robertnicholls9917 I think Jon is coming from an angle that sees large leaps forward in societal growth and how we got there. All of them were at the expense of some group of people. You can look at things like the American industrial revolution and see that all of that growth (in all senses of the word) was largely on the backs of slaves and low wage laborers. Plantations exploited slaves. Corporations abused their labor forces. It all lead to the societal growth that we have the luxury of enjoying today, but it was at the expense of others. Even today, businesses exploit their labor forces for profit. Even if you go back to ancient humans and observe that people survived and flourished when they came together as a community, there are still exploitative practices within those communities. But even if we say that it was primarily cooperation, rather than exploitation, that saw a community grow, it will inevitably end up with a controlling power that exploits others. If a community can remain small, cooperation is hugely successful. But once a group of people get large enough and/or come across another, separate, group of people then there will be exploitative practices. I think cooperation helped us survive to a point of thriving, but it's exploitation that has brought us to the point we are now. Within that exploitation, there is still cooperation, but we wouldn't have reached this point on cooperation alone. That being said, it's not right, but that is the reality none the less.

[@robertnicholls9917]

@@adidas2684 See, that's what I've been studying, to check if it's true. It's only in the last 500 years we have been fed this model by the ones who benefit from the exploitation. To this day, we believe in another idea that accompanied this line of thinking, race. Race never existed before European conquest. But, try telling anyone this fact, they'll refuse to believe it because we've been successfully indoctrinated. Huge, successful empires existed for the 200k years modern man came into being. I would argue, much of the technology today is just an evolution of ideas laid out over the last 12k years. The wheel, mathematics, astrology, the battery, farming and large cities/beautiful architecture were all ideas we copy today. And, from a lot of my research, I would argue, they did a lot of it better. The adobe mud huts laughed at in the West was genius technology, so was bamboo; 2 materials we are finally starting to explore again. Greece, Africa, Persia, Asia, the Middle East and the indigenous in North & South America/Caribbean left us a lot to work with. And, those 200k years were not full of violence or exploitation; it was mostly cooperation. The violence and exploitation we do read about are blips. The majority of humanity was very peaceful, we remain so to this day. It's less than 2% causing all the suffering. People like to use the excuse, there were less humans during those times but I think that's another fake metric to justify that we need suffering, violence and exploitation to advance. There is a great book I'm reading that does a deep dive into these questions and it pushes back on this corporate/capitalist created notion (The Dawn Of Everything A New History Of Humanity by David Graeber & David Wengrow). Even I would push back because the most growth we saw was after the New Deal and Keynesian Economics, which was largely socialist, lots of cooperation/community, involved immense capital controls and wealth distribution (extremely high taxes). During The Gilded Age that people glorify, there was mostly, destruction, pollution and poverty. Only the psychopaths prospered but not much REAL growth. Trust me, I once believed this notion that human advancement was due to exploitation until I started researching that argument. My research has led to facts that dispute this notion. Today, I believe it's mostly propaganda by 2% of psychopaths who exist in society. That said, I'm still trying to figure out what argument is the most true. I'm skeptical of the one you point to because the people who created that argument are the psychopaths.

[@davidhouston4810]

WOW, she is impressive, nice move Jon getting Ms Pierre-Louis on the show. It gives me a sliver of hope that such people exist.

[@nashton9964]

I thinks she is excited about the wrong things and is disingenuous about the effectiveness of the solutions she posed. I think like all great communists she thinks people are blank slates that can easily be changed, good luck. We need to look different forms of nuclear which she suggest we should look at in 2050, probably when all the rare earths for renewables becomes prohibitively expensive and we just have a bunch of broken panels and squeaky windmills. We need to be doing that now so we can successfully support EV infrastructure instead of forcing tax payers to make buses free so they can drive vast distances in rural areas all day to pick up a handful of passengers, that's just going to piss people off.

[@davidhouston4810]

@@nashton9964 You are just one of those who believes that any attempt at addressing the problem is a waste of time. Everything Ms Pierre-Louis said is infinitely possible, but you are simply to wrapped up in your own Negativity to admit it.

[@nashton9964]

@@davidhouston4810 that's not true at all, you can project whatever you want on me, but once you been studying climate change solutions and human behavior long enough you start to realize there are solutions that just won't work politically (at least democratically), and some that will. Jon realizes this which is where his pushback comes in the video. Yeah mass transit is effective, but it depends on the area, Massachusetts sure, Wyoming, no. "Infinitely possible" Listen man, that's a dreamy sentiment but not a realistic one, sorry one of your sacred cows does not have the best solutions in my opinion. She's trying the same line of thinking the oil companies are, "change your behavior, not the fundamental infrastructure". Oil companies know they will always be needed alongside solar and wind because those passive energy sources are not always active enough to support the grid. So guess what, burn more coal or dam up a river, and then since coal doesn't have regulations on cleaning radioactive pollution from trace elements in the coal, then you end up with more radiation spewed into the air over the life of a plant than nuclear which is highly regulated. Listen, I only seem wrapped up in negativity because it's frustrating how misled well meaning people are in this country from fossil fuel propaganda in Hollywood, which is built on oil money by the way.

[@ericthompson3982]

This woman is so clear headed and intelligent. It gives me hope. Damn, she's so good. Jon is really working to keep up with her, which is saying something.

[@doubtingtom92]

It makes me sad seeing him react so defensively to what she's suggesting. It's like I can see he wants to help but has trouble moving from "searching desperately for solutions" to "trying something new".

[@abiolajaja6856]

@@doubtingtom92 What are you talking about exactly? They are having conversation and asking her questions. Thats what people do during an interview. Get off your biases and keep an open mind! Not everyone has to agree. That why we live in a democracy.

[@Vortex1988]

@@abiolajaja6856 Democracy in the United States? Lolololololololol good one!

[@Vortex1988]

It doesn't give me any hope at all. No one ever listens to the smart ones, especially when the dumbest and most corrupt are in charge.

[@pdcdesign9632]

I don't know how old she is but she needs to slow down and reduce her upspeak style somewhat. She's well informed and intelligent 👍

[@MrChris20912]

"Humankind" by Rutger Bregman is a wonderful introduction to the kinds of things Kendra was pushing back on and dives much deeper into the nature and impacts of human cooperation.

[@chea7z913]

Jon, many people have pointed out that Kendra brings a rare form of optimism and solution based perspective in contrast to your somewhat cynical realism. The psychology she mentioned opened up a core issue with how to approach the dealing with the topics you bring up. I think this deserves it's own episode because how we go about creating change is just as important as identifying and solving "the problems"

[@abiolajaja6856]

He does not agree there is nothing wrong with that period! He's not being cynical. He's being realistic.

[@chea7z913]

@@abiolajaja6856 I tend to agree. But reality can be very bleak and unmotivating. This person seems resilient enough to orient her mind and attitude toward a positive direction, something I think realists could potentially get hung up on

[@abiolajaja6856]

@@chea7z913 True.

[@thesinaclwon]

@-GinΠΓ Τάο put the pipe down man and get some help 🙄

[@coolioso808]

Once "the problem" is identified and understood, naturally, we want to know what are the possible solutions. I agree. We need more of that. As important as the discussion on the problems are, it is equally, if not more important to talk about viable solutions because that is what gives people some meaningful purpose, hope and slight optimism about the future, rather than a constant bleak outlook. A good source of problem solving is looking at the system itself, and finding fundamental changes we can make in our own communities to make them efficient, sustainable and self-sufficient to the point that most essentials are free and we really don't even need an overarching elected (and usually corrupted) political class. In reality, our guide should be Natural Law, because that is something unavoidable. If we actually oriented our society to Natural Law resource based economies, we would see a great deal of health and well-being upgrades and a new sense of vitality among our people.

[@timothychimony8936]

Jon Stewart has the best content rn, reflecting on previous episodes with the best critics and giving them a platform is just superb

[@meatsong]

She is the most well prepared guest that they've had on this show by a long shot. I'm stunned by how quickly and consistently she was able to pull an apt and effectively composed rebuke to Jon's devil's advocate arguments. Well done! I sincerely hope we will get to hear much more from her, here and elsewhere.

[@thethegreenmachine]

She reminds me of Glen Greenwald. I have the responses in my head, but I have to grope around in there to find them. It might take me a few seconds or a few days. Not so, these two. I envy that.

[@thephildiamond]

@@johnsparks007 so then what is the answer?

[@IizUname]

She's frequently on a podcast called "How to Save a Planet", that's where you can find her.

[@thethegreenmachine]

@@johnsparks007 There will always be a government of one kind or another.

[@toleyk]

She should be an advisor to Congress and the President. She doesn't present lofty ideas, presents solutions that have been executed and can be evaluated with data.

[@ltjgambrose]

Do everyone a favor and give Kendra a call every so often. I'd love to see a video featuring her on this channel every other month.

[@Jinchuricki27]

One of the most brilliant guest i have seen or heard in some time. This is the type of discourse this topic and this country need. Thank you Kendra and Jon.

[@tonyabrookes9931]

What a lovely optimistic intelligent human this young woman is! She gives me hope

[@gigahalem9584]

Thank you Jon and team for all the work you do to bring an intelligent discussion to the table - we must all speak louder about these issues!

[@plomby24]

Gibraltar has a free bus service for the Gibraltarian population and what about LFTR reactors?

[@nedludd7622]

@Steve Sherman You must have been listening in a coma.

[@IizUname]

@@nedludd7622 Imagine being as delusional as Steve

[@IizUname]

@@plomby24 You're saying reactors twice with your use of that acronym. LFTRs are cool but not feasible enough in the short term (10 years).

[@gherieg.1091]

@@IizUname Check that you’re not the delusional ones. For example, do you believe that science is behind Covid Fauci shutdowns ? If so, then how do you explain persistent and ham fisted Censorship of dissenting opinions by tenured experts in relevant fields ?

[@PraetorianAU]

What an awesome interview. One of the best I've seen on this channel. I'd like to see more from Kendra. Please bring her back for more talks in future.

[@ricaard]

If she comes back, she kinda snubbed the invite with her response to Jon's hope to see her again...

[@recycleme1224]

I love Kendra. I’ve done things in MUCH smaller scale where people said, you can’t do that, because it requires something new, different, relearning. But you definitely can do it.

[@tankfire20]

It was extremely inspiring to hear Kendra's points on fixing America. It's a very hopeful and multi purpose approach.

[@TheMosayat]

I really had no expectations or interest before I clicked on this video, and this guest ended up becoming my favorite person that jon interviewed! She's legitimately very effective and knowledgable, AND very fun too! And jon provided that sense of realism and the opposite point of view that he's always so good at

[@aadoggo]

Kendra Pierre-Louis is awesome. Thank you Jon for paying attention to your twitter comments and inviting this bright light. She gives me hope. I hope her being on your podcast opens up a *much* wider audience to her (and her educated, outside the drone box, real solution oriented thinking.)

[@sunMMVIII]

She is excellent! So much clarity and positivity and detail in her suggestions

[@nashton9964]

She does the opposite of give me hope, to me she symbolizes a movement that pushes idealism rather than realism in . There's a distinct lack of knowlege about the history of energy and why a thing like nuclear power became prohibitively expensive because of fossil fuel lobbying outrageous regulations that would hurt their own industry if applied to themselves. Also, all her ideas would be a nightmare for rural communities and are regressive for poor people.

[@JC_inc]

@@nashton9964 Your point is 100% oil industries’ perspective.

[@I.Odnamra]

@@nashton9964 that's all climate activist's do tho. They're all about ideas but have no real plausible solution.

[@nashton9964]

@@JC_inc You mean calling out fossil fuel for making nuclear energy a boogeyman because it directly competes with them? How is that flattering or "100% oil industry perspective"? Screw fossil fuels, more nuclear is my position, take time to absorb information, sir. Or is your position that poor and rural people dont matter in terms of collateral damage? This lady isnt going to ride her bike to the store in rural Vermont, it's just disingenuous as well as her comment on the NY subway. Sounds like lying in an "ends justify the means" sort of way.

[@mightydrew1970]

Kendra needs to be on every TV, KZbin and Facebook video from now until we actually start to make change. Genius. So eloquently explains how it's all related.

[@littlestbroccoli]

Her ability for systemic thinking and communication of those ideas is unparalleled in today's media. I'm simply stunned.

[@somitafekete3005]

Thank you for this discussion, I am downloading Kendra’s book now… I live in Texas, we have lots of sunshine but very little rain so water conservation and retaining carbon sink is important in this environment. This summer we changed our irrigation system from pop-up heads to a buried tubular system to lower evaporation. I was wondering how to efficiently use solar panels for energy conversion, so I enjoyed Kendra’s comment about solar panels and sheep. Another podcast talked about some farmers planting ground cover in a fallow field through a carbon credit exchange plan with major agricultural companies. Food for thinking outside the box! Thank you both!

[@KarenAnne1965]

Intelligent meaningful thoughtful conversation. Holy shit. We need more of this.

[@kikidee9623]

She’s great, its a beautiful thing to listen to a conversation that you can come away with a new perspective on a subject that’s regularly been driven in a one directional rut.

[@tonywilson4713]

As an engineer who's sick and tired of idiots in the media, I am utterly surprised how well she understands the nuances of the subject. Normally STEM people are furious with these people because they leave us having to explain everything the next day. Of the non-STEM people in the media she's incredibly good at the details compared to so many others in the media including Jon. But she has one huge fault, which Jon exposes around 32:00 when he tries to explain to her that a massive chunk of the population are reactionary and not forward thinking. Sadly I have to agree with John on this part. What she's saying simply doesn't gel with historical fact. If humans were forward thinking climate change would have been dealt with decades ago.

[@somchai9033]

She’s nuts

[@bezimeni2000]

@@tonywilson4713 not only that, her idea about army public transit is really not tought out and norway is country of 5400000 people, so you cant compare usa and norway

[@tonywilson4713]

@@bezimeni2000 She's very typical of what I call "Kumbaya Lefties." Just as there are varieties of right wingers there are varieties of left wingers too. I'm an engineer so I'm also quite pragmatic about solutions. My mother was a lefty school teacher and her mother was a card carrying right winger. So I got both sides growing up and BOTH warned me about people from their OWN side driven by unrealistic ideologies. My mother in particular hated feminists and yet she fought for equal pay for women teachers. My grandmother was devoutly Christian but had not time for loud mouth fundamentalists. Both were pragmatic about solving problems. This whole "we'll just do this and that and sing Kumbaya" and things will magically fix themselves is what ruins the left the time. They are really good at ideas for WHAT society should do but absolutely hopeless about HOW to do those things. As a result the moment they start talking about HOW to do things they look and sound like idiots. Case in point her public transport solution.

[@Zyloch]

@@tonywilson4713 If you being an engineer is the solution to this problem, then why aren't more engineers contributing to the solution? At this point we can blame her lack of understanding all we want, but none of us seem to be working together to even try to make the idea viable and moving forward with a solution.

[@sampal5352]

This was really good. I think Jon was a stand in for us who are deeply disappointed and exhausted by the way political and economic forces that are extremely new in terms of history but have worn down many people with more collective, positive intentions. That’s why we need fresh thinkers, who’ve done detailed work, energized people of different lived experience to broaden the perspective on the problem and the solutions. I feel like Jon got challenged in some ways that made it a little awkward around human cooperation esp (well known by evolutionary standards as the reason we are all still here) and that understanding how everything is connected, especially the voting issue- is a major part of shifting apathy into action. Enough with the binaries- thank you Jon to showing in real time how we get stuck into traps of seeing each other as deeply cynical and/or pie in the sky idealistic, rather than really looking for the space in the middle that can bring the lessons of both to bear on this massive issue. And damn she was fierce!!

[@thomasjohnson308]

I could not have said this better...I think you nailed it with this comment. I can identify both with what Jon feels about the essentially exploitative nature of humans and with what Kendra says about that being a result not of our nature but with the dominant Western mode of thought. That mode of thought came about because we're capable of it but it doesn't represent _all_ that we're capable of. It's hard sometimes to push back the bleak despair and get some perspective when the scope of these problems are so big but I know there are kind and compassionate people all over the world showing that it's possible to be better than we are. I'm with Kendra that if we want change we have to hold our politicians accountable and make sure that the people have a voice, because the less we have a voice and the will to make it meaningful the more we're just a resource to the ones who hold power.

[@samuelfitzsimmons1740]

Well said

[@drakoan]

In some ways Japan provides a bit of a roadmap. They still have an understanding of their relationship to nature as organisms and it shows in a lot of their design principles. Now socio-culturally they are having different problems but in terms of industry and design and food there is a little to learn there. We fundamentally have to understand that we know no other way to sustain populations of our sort, but we do need to start pursuing alternatives and respecting all perspectives: this does still mean not dismissing any perspectives regardless of prejudices well meaning or otherwise.

[@buttafan4010]

STEWART / ROGAN 2024 PEOPLE'S PARTY TICKET Kendra Pierre-Louis for Interior Secretary. Tulsi for Secretary of State.

[@buttafan4010]

WORLDWIDE GENERAL STRIKE AND CEASE FIRE! 2022!

[@edwardlulofs444]

I'm a senior. When I listen to Kendra Pierre-Louis, I have hope for the future. Thank you.

[@nedludd7622]

My senior feeling as well, though I do not have much hope because of the powers that be.

[@somethingsomethang]

A senior and a leftist…someone never grew a brain lol

[@Chezzy79]

That the future will be just as divisive, misguided, and racist as it is now? Gotcha

[@somethingsomethang]

@@nedludd7622 if you’re not a leftist as a child you have no heart…if you’re not conservative when by the time you get old you’re fucking broken…look at you

[@edwardlulofs444]

@@nedludd7622 I have beliefs and hope because I want to and need to.

[@RobertDiVito]

Kendra is an impressive, eloquent and intelligent voice on so many topics. What a refreshing perspective on immediately relevant issues.

[@guamae]

"It's better for parents, and it's better for drunks!" I love everything you're saying Kendra, and we'd live in a better world if we could force our "leaders" to agree with you!

[@survivormary1126]

So let's just put drunks on the same bus with kids. Brilliant. SMH at how truly scary that is.

[@guamae]

@@survivormary1126 if you're so worried, don't have your kids out at 2 am when the bars close 🤷

[@survivormary1126]

@@guamae Your delusional if you think DRUNKS are only out at 2am. I NYC the bars stop serving at 4am, then empty, people go to after parties or dinners bombed out of their minds, so just when the kid is going to school about 6 am, maybe having a transfer...whoop der it is. Also DRUNKS don't have a time schedule :) Check when buses run as well. They don't run all night. The bus stops are worse. I personally know someone who was shot in Cleveland at a bus stop and a fellow student of my uncles shot at a mass transit in Cleveland. Long way to go before CHILDREN should be able to travel alone that way. Even on a plane, the child is appointed an attendee and that is so very contained.

[@ziggy7077]

@@guamae bars close? Lol

[@guamae]

@@ziggy7077 bars close every day 🤪

[@1chumley1]

I love that Kendra looks at things from a solutions vs problems mindset. She seems less cynical than Jon, and this is what we need more of.

[@newagain9964]

She’s clearly informed/educated on the issues. But as usual, Stewart is not. Ppl seem forget he’s an entertainer. Just check the comments on his vids.

[@senorelroboto2]

@@newagain9964 Unfortunately I would say that Stewart has a much better understanding of how people feel and the political difficulties that need to be addressed.

[@gopibble]

Jon has been involved for decades and has experienced our governments unwillingness to move on things first hand on something as simple as extending medical Benefits to the 911 first responders.. being younger has the benefits of energy and hopefulness. But this world grinds you to dust.. America isn’t like the rest of the world. I remember the pushback in the 80’s just trying to get Americans on the metric system. The guest was awesome but in the end sadly naive about how the world is here. The Problem has been a showcase of wonderful ideas and potential solutions to our current woes.. none of which will see the light of day.. we aren’t a country of patriots, we are a country of individuals looking out for numero uno. Apathy will be our downfall in a nation where the majority of us have no interest in making personal sacrifices

[@newagain9964]

@@senorelroboto2 huh? Stewart…whose been a millionaire for decades has a better understanding of the wants and needs of the plebs? Ooookkkkk

[@adambrickell6425]

@@newagain9964 Jon Stewart is just another leftist celebrity pushing something that doesn't exist.

[@carsonwieker]

Kendra is amazing. Thanks for this convo & having her on. Cheers

[@tomcop668]

Wow. Kendra opened my eyes to things I never thought about like cutting a check to lower income people to offset fuel prices and how desegregation brought in an era of destroying social programs.

[@joshk.6246]

She's got a broad set of knowledge and is well spoken. Also calm and funny. I really enjoyed her as a guest.

[@jasonfirewalker3595]

Sorry. Thought you were being disingenuous.

[@ojstwitteraccount9912]

I make less money than you so venmo me please

[@jasonfirewalker3595]

@@ojstwitteraccount9912 If you'd ever experienced hardship you would not say such things.

[@t4llbot138]

absolutely. I have studied economic history of 20th Century North America - the dismantling of the mid-20th century welfare state and the transition to neoliberal "free market" economics, beginning in the 70s - and never really considered that relationship between race, desegregation and the subsequent dissolution of social supports. But, the idea of cutting a check to the poor has been around for quite some time and has been gaining momentum lately: Basic Income - all those below a certain income threshold get a monthly payment - it's a perfectly simple solution to help people survive, and they are just going to spend the money on meeting basic needs and this keeps the economy going. Easy peasy. Although to get the political will to achieve this we need to dispel the notion of poor people taking advantage of the government and getting free handouts. Interestingly, this relates to the racist relationship of the dismantling of social programs to begin with. It was in the 70s where media propaganda started pushing the narrative of "Welfare Queens", who were described as, typically black african american single women somehow living large off of income assistance and working the system. The idea of the poor taking advantage of government handouts in ludicrous when we can all see the way that the super rich and big corporations have been made wealthy by government handouts, subsidies, bailouts and tax loopholes etc. We need to change the narrative in order to create change. Extreme wealth inequality is already well known - with help from movements like occupy Wall Street shining a light on it. We need to do the same on changing the narrative around government support systems - that all people, regardless of their job(s) or employment status, deserve the right to participate in the economy, - or else we are going to have a growing homeless population and more and more tent cities

[@dude8632]

I am continually impressed with what Jon Stewart is doing with his platform. Fight on John! Death to mainstream media!

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

Agreed. This was one of the best interviews I’ve watched in a long time.

[@TheCommonS3Nse]

Wow, Kendra is great! She really nails it on the “what are the best solutions” framing as opposed to the “who are the worst offenders” framing. And her admission at the end that the bigger problem is voter suppression. Amazing. She’s really got a good sense of how to address this issue, as well as some of the other issues the US is facing.

[@ubercoo]

Nice interview, Kendra brings up good point about city planning that seemed glossed over. Most local or state Govs allow companies like Lowes or Walmart to purchase 65 acres & use over half of it for parking. Then the city has 8 lane roads, no walking paths or helping to support small local business in order to divert daily commerce flow such as into poorer neighborhoods. The fossil fuel industry isn't the only enemy for the future of energy and socioeconomic prosperity, there is also the aviation & automobile industries, local & state governments, and so on. We truly need a full philosophic revolution of ideas in America and how to tackle these monumental problems. If the old book doesn't work, it's time to write a new one.

[@kespos-0]

I really appreciate that this conversation was shared. Reality is uncomfortable and this is how we have to engage. Learned a ton and need to start following Kendra!

[@derekbaker3768]

This woman is a true OG. She knows her subject and has perspective. Promote her. Protect her. Give her a speaking coach :) She will help change the world for better.

[@TheologyVGM]

Discourse isn't dead! Thank you so much Jon!

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

Yea, I found this incredibly refreshing to listen to!

[@LDixon21]

I never been to NY. But my wife who was born and raised in FL. Went to DC and fell in love with the subway. Everywhere we went, " Are we getting on the train?"

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

One of my weird quirks is that I think public transportation is simply the coolest thing in the world. Los Angeles has big stuff in the works for the metro and I personally can’t wait to ditch my car forever as a result.

[@merryhardy5173]

The lense of solutions! Wow, she is wonderful. This young lady needs her own show, we need a team of her 😊👍

[@comforteagle10]

How To Save A Planet is a great podcast!

[@ozzielinkin]

As long as the people in power are old white guys like cruz and graham and trump we are in trouble.

[@ozzielinkin]

We need people like jon stewart and kendra Pierre louis in power

[@abiolajaja6856]

I hope not. She is too arrogant and only speaks from a Cosmopolitan point of view like many liberals. A lack of sympathy towards people from rural areas as Jon pointed out by making the case gas prices would go up. She said - so what...

[@djdollase]

Another awesome video/podcast! Love this girl. She looks like someone I’d see on the subway any day and never know she’s a sorta genius. And love her upbeat , positive, fix-it attitude vs Jon’s usual pessimism.

[@iansenekal5110]

Wow, I'm not even American and I found this informative and inspiring. This type of discussion need to be had all around the world.

[@widowkeeper4739]

I really loved this interview and hope you'll have Kendra on again in the future!

[@traviscooper8037]

Thank you for having this conversation.

[@alexwilson5320]

This was great! Everything is a solution. I need more Kendra in my life.

[@robbingcars9140]

It’s amazing that so many problems we face are actually connected to each other

[@gingerhickerson5792]

Greed!!!

[@LisaPellegrino]

Wonderful discussion and debate, thank you Jon and Kendra. My only gripe is Jon skirting the issue when Kendra aptly named racism as the reason why we've lacked structural change for our social systems. Disappointed that Jon felt the need to rebrand it as "resource hoarding", but proud that Kendra stood her ground calling it what it is. Let's keep this vital discourse alive!

[@CampbellMC90]

She said it with a massive smile on her face, but lets not pretend like the people at the top care about poor white people any more than a poor PoC. Were all just grunts at the bottom, the racism card is just there to help keep us divided further. Jon knows this, the people at the top just want more, they don't care who they take it from.

[@madisondampier3389]

Resource hoarding a la racism, they can both be right, one of them just isn't saying the quiet part out loud

[@CampbellMC90]

@@madisondampier3389 Racism is never the quiet part, it is the first thing people yell as loud as they can, and it just makes it PoC vs whites for no reason. Every social program around is based on propping up women and PoCs, hiring and school admissions are blatantly biased against white and asian males. We need to increase support to ALL people, and treat ALL people as equals.

[@LisaPellegrino]

@@CampbellMC90 I agree, this is the highest ideal. Absolutely, yes, I'm here for all the egalitarianism. However when women and Africans were considered property not people in our not-too-distant past, one could say we're experiencing a type of moral hangover. Our treatment of Native Americans to this day is unlawful based on the very treaties we've signed and agreed to. So needless to say, there's a long road ahead of racial justice and healing, but we have to be able to talk about the hard stuff while being solution-oriented. IMHO this must precede addressing climate change, basically due to Maslow's Hierarchy. It is near impossible for those that lack their basic needs like food and safety, to be able to think and act with long term intentions for the greater good...OR is this precisely what Kendra was arguing, was that is a belief that prevails only in the American mindset??

[@staceystrukel1917]

Best quote of this conversation regarding the military "we give them enough money". Please talk more about military waste.

[@scharb]

Excellent interview! Thank you, Kendra and Jon!

[@ChrisSham]

This one interview is so much better than the entire planned set of climate change videos. Pierre-Louis's understanding and explanation of so many of the factors is way deeper than Stewart's, and she's offering some concrete solutions, which is vital. But this one also reveals an important flaw in Jon's thinking: He believes humans can't be trusted (we are selfish, we are reactionary, etc., which Pierre-Louis counters well), but he seems unable to imagine how that applies the same or worse to fossil company owners, and how badly it can, has already, and will continue to kill us if we keep leaving the power in their hands. If he truly believes his concept of human nature, he should be fighting with all his strength and clout to get power out of fossil hands, not advocating for voluntarily giving them even more responsibility over all our lives.

[@dbunik44]

he already has done that as far as burn pits, referencing his clout, but he's not an expert, he's a comedian who I suspect tests at a higher percentile than most, but he can only do so much, until we get money out of politics, nothing will change and that's the drum he has been beating for years

[@MrSen4lifE]

I think there is a fair disagreement to make and it centers around "time". We're already long past the point of no return for climate change. So it is worth having the discusson: what gets us onto renewable energy faster and cutting down our emissions significantly? 1) Removing incentives already in place and creating new ones to get a deeply entrenched industry to convert their product or 2) Annihilating that industry while simultaneously building another I also think there's a bit of a flaw to what you're saying. Corporations aren't people. I keep hearing this same argument and then from the same people I hear about how the CEOs don't give a shit, just want a fat paycheck and will move on. ... Well so will any corporation. Why does the company names actually matter? If we're agreeing that human nature is generally predictable, why avoid abusing it then? I'm not fully convinced this counter-narrative is all that much more than a sentiment for revenge. That's not what you would get. Even if you rebuilt the industry, nothing stops the same investors and others from going over there. So what does your solution actually accomplish? And how does it accomplish it better than Jon's?

[@Novacasa88]

@@MrSen4lifE Exactly. While I appreciate the views of his guest. She's coming from a far less realistic set of Ideas and John is more pessimistic. So somewhere in between is probably the optimal.

[@Janube]

He's not "unable to imagine how that applies the same or worse" to fossil fuel companies/their owners/their shareholders; he's *RELYING* on it. Companies have a greedy, selfish, reactionary throughline, but it's a *VERY* predictable one: they're after profit. If you offer them a way to increase their profit by doing the right thing, the vast majority will do it if they genuinely stand to gain more money (after costs and risks are factored in). The issue for getting people to collectively do the right thing is that it's much harder by orders of magnitude to rally millions and millions of people to agree on a cause, and you don't have the same capacity to offer them profits to do it- additionally because they're not corporations, many don't use the same logic to go from point A to point B. Some people think fossil fuels should stay in use solely because that's what they grew up on. They don't have the cold calculous of a company that seeks to make the most money possible for the least effort, so it's far far far harder to predict them (and then capitalize on that predictability for public good). The bigger problem here is that doing what Pierre-Louis says (just fixing the media to accurately report on policy, fixing the electorate to actually stay informed, and fixing the legislature to focus on doing what's best for society) is *way harder* than you or she thinks it is, in no small part because all of these problems are connected and have become tangled. Like a box of Christmas lights, you can't just rip one out; it doesn't work that way (for example, if we could snap our fingers and suddenly make all reporting objective, it wouldn't take long for profits to dip for that industry. Clickbait works, sensationalism works, etc. After profits dip, those companies would eventually return to sensationalism, so you can't just fix that problem in isolation). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to do nothing, but if we wanted to do this right to *actually* solve the problem, we would need to get money out of politics first and foremost, and we would probably have to fundamentally change the judiciary (at least the supreme court) to make sure that the money doesn't just start flowing back in. That alone is a MONUMENTAL task that requires a bold president, 50+ bold senators who all agree on those two points (and the method to solving them), and for them to carry out the plan before the intense rhetoric destroys them in the midterms. From there, they would need to make heavy changes to voting rights and likely PR/DC statehood to ensure republicans don't take back the senate. You feel me? We haven't even come close to starting on energy yet. This is all foundational work that could take a decade or more to fully iron out, and *everything* has to go right along the way to avoid republicans taking it all back halfway through. In Jon's estimate, using fossil fuel companies' greed to get them on the healthier track is literally just more plausible and faster. And I think it's inarguable that he's right. It's not ideal, but if climate change needs handled yesterday (which it does), we can't afford to do this the most optimal way (which is what I outlined above). We have to employ jury-rigged fixes that get the job done NOW, and reapproach structurally in the near future.

[@ChrisSham]

@@MrSen4lifE WE have one or two points of disagreement: 1. I'm not saying that people are scummy and untrustworthy, Jon is. My view is more neutral, though I generally expect owners and senior management of fossil companies to behave worse than average, based on decades of real-world experience. (I think people like to have a quick, pithy notion of human nature, just because it's comforting and convenient to believe it's all that simple. In reality, society is just plain complicated, and there are no easy shortcuts around us.) 2. I think you are mistaken to say that "Removing incentives already in place" is not exactly the same thing, practically speaking, as "Annihilating that industry". Either way, totally annihilating fossil fuels IS the urgent goal. With my side hopefully a bit clearer, I hope it's obvious that I'm not remotely interested in revenge. The bad guys of this story can live happily ever after, as far as I'm concerned, so long as they stop getting in the way of necessary progress. But the status quo clearly isn't making them get out of the way, and I can't see Jon's simplistic idea making them change enough either. Given the choice, they WILL drag their feet, they WILL try to squeaze out every last cent from fossil fuels that they can, in addition to anything else we compell them to do, and it'll all just slow the process down unnecessarily. They will do this for exactly the reason Jon suggests: To get even richer. I think it's wishful thinking to believe that surviving global heating will be anything other than hugely difficult and expensive. And I think the fossil companies know that. There will be no real profit in saving the world until decades (even centuries?) later. So surrendering the reins to them is very unlikely to see them rushing to do the right thing on their own. You might be imagining keeping them on a much shorter leash, forcing them to do things right. But if you have the power, authority and organisational capacity to really ensure that, then why not skip out the middle men? Once you have an oversight organisation of that level, you basically already have the necessary replacement for the fossil companies, and so have no need for them. And if you lack such an organisation, then how the hell do you make sure this idea actually works?

[@k3v1n47]

Kendra's disagreement with Jon's assertions on "Human Nature" is spot on. We in the Western world have a silly point of view of human nature. _"We're selfish"_ No. No we are fkn not. WE are a cooperative species. That's how we succeeded. No one person can build a fkn rocket to the moon. That's the way we work. Cooperatively. The enemy of our species, the ones who desire hierarchy (parasites), have invested a lot of energy into convincing us, we are other than what we actually are.

[@dying_allthetime]

That's reductive and also you cannot change human nature

[@scottparr5606]

Sometimes humans coopt but more often slaver types usurp the land and people like Ukraine as we speak.

[@k3v1n47]

@@dying_allthetime _"That's reductive and also you cannot change human nature"_ Okay. Define it for me. What is "human nature"? What is immutable, unchangable in "human nature". Tell us. BTW, where is the "reductive" part of what I wrote?

[@k3v1n47]

@@f3lcrow IDK...cooperative and social, sure. *Every human civilization that has ever existed, particularly the more successful ones were cooperative in nature.* But we still prioritize ourselves and our comforts. *This is something that almost every social species does. But, most individuals prioritizes the comfort and survival of others. Children, for example. People will sacrifice themselves to preserve the life of a child.* *The elderly or infirm is another example. Surely it would be easier to just chuck them in the oceans, then forget about 'em. Why do we let them live?* *Maybe your assertion is myopic?* Maybe it's just the area I live in (S. Florida) and my perception of its general public. *The woman in this video pointed out the differences in the behaviors exhibited around the world and how the US is an anomaly. I haven't checked to verify the things she said, but to me it rings true.*

[@k3v1n47]

@@scottparr5606 Ukraine is a complex issue. One that arose because the of the individual greed/stupidity/neglect of players in that game. In the early 90s as the USSR fell, negotiations with the US and Western economic and military powers, made a verbal agreement with Russia that NATO would not expand. For the next 30 years, despite their verbal agreement, they did just that. Expand right up to the borders of Russia. The Russians for 30 years said that was their red line. In 2014 or so, the Obama administration, did a coup in Ukraine. They took advantage of an unpopular (and corrupt) leader and the protests against him and his power structure. We sided with neo-Nazis. Some members of the Obama administration (notably Joe Biden) personally profited from that coup. See Burisma. This Ukrainian crisis has been brewing for 30 years. Warnings were issued by Russia and more importantly to us in the US, by learned foreign policy watchers and diplomatic experts, that was ignored or sidelined by people with power. If your neighbor is warned not to put a gun range in their back yard as it endangers you and yours, and they do it anyway, there will be repercussions. Law may be called in to stop it. If nation states hold monopoly on violence, then guess what they'll do? They will do violence if threatened. Even the perception of threat will trigger this violence. This Ukraine thing was predictable. In fact, it was predicted for 30 years. Ukraine isn't a good example of _"human nature."_ Its an example of the incompetence/malevolence of our "leaders" and national security apparatus.

[@brett2themax]

Thank you for always being informative. Kendra is absolutely fantastic. I hope she becomes a regular resource for this topic. She does a fantastic job of explaining the complexity and interconnectivity of climate change.

[@yopotico]

Incredible interview. Shows how many problems we have in the US and world. Scary

[@survivormary1126]

Listening to this again and had a customer yesterday with her father that just came back from first trip to NYC and first thing out of their mouths was how disgusting the subway was and how he felt like he needed a shower after taking it.

[@johnsmith8981]

What an great interview she makes so many good points.

[@hq4287]

+

[@theysisossenthime]

Thank you Kendra. I wish more people would listen to what you have to say. I would also like to comment on your view of the Western bias you mentioned. I spent the first half of my childhood in what is the definition of a W.E.I.R.D. household and the second half of my childhood in a household with an adoptive mother coming from Japan to the U.S. I wouldn't go so far as to romanticize it, but the greater sense of cooperation and planning verse reactionary behaviors was something I very much experienced. It was a culture shock to my teenage self. And although I am undeniably American, I find myself every year valuing, acting, and speaking in ways that more and more resemble my adoptive mother. Something that my experiences have caused me to endlessly debate with no clear answer is, are people: 1) inherently selfish and irresponsible to society, having to learn to value/benefit society, 2) inherently value what is good for society, having to learn selfish behavior, or 3) other... At the end of any argument or debate, does it really matter? Does answering this question or having the most scientifically correct answer impact what the most correct thing is for us to do in the face of racism, climate change, or any of the problems/crises we face? After all, isn't the success of the human species more related to adaptability and creativity than it is any other "built in" property?

[@JAMinerViews]

I really enjoy the ability of this platform to see not only free-flow conversations without constraint (commercials, other topics, etc), but that people like Kendra can reach out with knowledge and Jon can then bring them on to present, discuss, and correct the record where needed. ❤️♥️

[@schroederce7112]

I loved this so much. Kendra is so intelligent and positive and this was so valuable to me. Thank you!

[@DavidAmrod]

Love all the info and the approach! Also Loved the torn split screen.

[@laminarflowone]

She is amazing! A true expert who is clear, concise, eloquent. The Amsterdam used to be car-centric, it really wasn't so long ago. The Netherlands has great road solutions for rural environments too, it's not just for cities.

[@TazControl9]

Damn, what a great conversation! My mind has opened to so many new possibilities. They are both so thoughtful, conscientious and hopeful. Love it

[@robertnicholls9917]

There is a reason media never platforms people like her.

[@ithacamoore8327]

Have her on again. She really pushed the conversation. She had real solutions. She gave hope. Thank you.

[@drwalka10]

Real solutions ? U mean UNrealist solutions

[@robertnicholls9917]

@@drwalka10 Point out what you thought was unrealistic.

[@drwalka10]

@@robertnicholls9917 tell me the most Realistic idea she had and i'll be glad to tell u why it's not feasible

[@robertnicholls9917]

@@drwalka10 Lol, you're the one complaining not me. Just say you can't refute her points, it's fine. It's on you not me.

[@drwalka10]

@@robertnicholls9917 I ask you to point out something you consider her most reasonable idea regarding climate change, because im not going to type a counterarguments for EVERYTHING I found unrealistic or non-factual. Understand ?

[@nunosantos5376]

Bringing a person to dispute your previous piece...what a novel idea!! Thank you very much Edit: this lady has the most pleasant face ever

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

It plays into “letting science lead the way” as well. A huge part of the scientific process is encountering new data and being able to change your opinion. So great to see that behavior modeled on a large platform!

[@gingerhickerson5792]

She reminds me in a cute female way of Kenan Thompson who I admire very much

[@Star_Stellar_777]

Adding to the many comments here saying the same - this was a great conversation, bring Kendra back again!

[@bunyslayer]

Damn this talk just gets better and better, thank you for having Kendra on the show! I really feel this will help drive the narrative that Jon has been searching for in everyone he's been talking to. Good job guys.

[@theovernight1915]

"Nuclear isn't an option because it takes too long to build." Was definitely the most controversial and interesting statement I heard in this interview.

[@senorelroboto2]

Yeah, nuclear is too hard. But what we are going to do is decarbonize our society in 8 years. Totally congruent. /s

[@CatherineA133]

I’m glad that nuclear was only a footnote in this conversation /s. Nuclear power needs to be put back on the table. We could transition entirely to clean energy in the next 2 decades but the powers that be won’t let it happen.

[@C-bc6fj]

Clearly nuclear power is not clean energy (yet), but I can see how it might be possible to supplement other renewable energy sources to drastically reduce or eliminate fossil fuel dependence. As an aside, I hope for a day when every fossil fuel company CEO is forced to do something worthwhile for humanity to feed themselves, like donating their extra organs, participatation in medical trials or sex work. You know -- a good, honest side-hustle.

[@moon_wizard1250]

Yeah that's the biggest thing I was skeptical of. Like, how long does it take to build a new plant? A few years at most, and I think we have that long. China is currently testing thorium reactors. Assuming no major issues arise, I see no reason we can't build 1-2 of those in every state / country / territory / etc. Yeah as I understand the fuel could be weaponized, but it's still 1000x cleaner than any other energy option. It's worth the risk, and it's the best option we've got.

[@rustomarmillo2154]

what a great discussion...i would love to hear more from her. happy to have stumbled on this podcast

[@a.taylor8294]

GREAT point, Kendra, on recycling!

[@fords_nothere_100]

Another great segment. Really enjoyed hearing Pierre-Louis' takes and espec her willingness to think more holistically when making strategic suggestions. I see lots of ppl with good intentions making the very mistakes she points out, like dismissing ALL of recycling as pointless.

[@BartholomewFlutist]

This was such an important conversation to me. Thank you both.

[@fnizzelwhoop]

I like that Jon asked good, tough, questions, and Kendra could reply instantly -- with very little fluff. Clearly she's thought long and hard about these things. It was a very interesting discussion, and brought some much needed optimism.

[@renebecker5503]

Being from Upstate New York (total country, cows, horses, tractors), then moving to New York City and NOW living in Frankfurt, Germany. I appreciate and love public transport. And wish we had more. Kendra! You give me hope. More people need to listen to you. Thank you Jon & team for the excellent content. (Also - re Nuclear Energy, Germany was totally spooked by Fukushima and, yes, people are scared of the risks.)

[@TheRealJamesKirk]

I'm also from Upstate (Rochester), now in ATL, but I spent two months in München back around 2003. It's sad that Die Leute are so anti-nuclear. 4th gen designs like the Traveling Wave reactor and the Molten Salt Thorium Reactors have passive safety features that completely stop fission if ANYTHING goes wrong. You could be a nexus for info about 4G technology, and help your friends to understand how safe they are. Even today's operating reactors are far more safe than coal-fired generation. The fear of nuclear is another example of people's inability to assess risk. Flying is way safer than driving, no matter how you look at it - per km. or per trip - but there are many who still fear flying. Fossil fuel generation has killed orders of magnitude more people than fission, but people still fear nuclear. The Travelling Wave design can burn up existing nuclear waste, which is a major problem with earlier reactor designs. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor

[@Nicholasvelaz22]

@@TheRealJamesKirk I don't know much about traveling wave reactors, very interesting stuff. I have for many years thought that LFTRs and other variations of molten salt/modular reactors would be the future, with Asian countries like China and Indonesia taking the lead (despite the original technology being developed in the US). Thanks to the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment, we know this technology works, and much of the R&D has already been done. This technology in my opinion is the most sensible option, as it provides a much greater energy density than fossil fuels, and of course renewables. I think renewable energy has its place, but most people I talk to about it don't understand just how great the energy demand is for things like metallurgy, recycling, etc. where large amounts of energy are needed for extended periods of time. I think solar/wind power is better for powering, let's say, a house, where energy is in less demand than in it is in the industrial setting. Other than that, I find these technologies to be more of a fantasy in terms of replacing fossil fuels completely. You simply cannot get away from the energy density issue, despite further advances in renewable tech (which I support btw, the more innovation the better).

[@rudysal1429]

Fukushima was an extreme situation and Germany could never have such a situation happen to them. The fault line was extremely close to shore, I think less than 50 km. Japan itself is in a massive fault line. The subduction zone, where one plate goes under another, released the tension of the top one as it "sticks" to the other until the friction force is overcome and snaps back up. In this case it was about 3m, I don't remember exactly the numbers. Just imagine the ocean floor snapping up about 3m instantly and all the water being dispersed and the water traveling fast enough and only needing to travel a short distance. Nuclear fusion is safe for the most part. There are some issues but I haven't studied recent engineering techniques to deal with cooling the heated water used to cool down the cooling system before it is returned to the environment and a few other issues. I still think it is way more beneficial than other types of energy if it is available and accessible. Transportation is another issue and living in a suburb is great but also issues with traveling, driving, traffic and parking but hopefully public transport could be fixed because I would love to be able to get to downtown in 10 minutes rather than 30-45.

[@newagain9964]

I’m thinking of taking a job near Frankfurt…what’s it really like there? FYI, I currently live in the Caribbean. It’s a tough choice. Never been to Germany.

[@dinabowers3009]

Kendra is really on point Jon. Thanks Kendra, for keeping it realer than many want to hear of or know of.

[@ourglass3346]

This was absolutely great!!!

[@DH-bf9xb]

Jon's cynicism sometimes affects his skepticism. Glad they're having experts on to offer alternate perspectives on these issues.

[@shmarts8469]

Exactly! Probably the best way to a solution is to open a civil dialog with someone who has a different veiw

[@Marijuanifornia]

Still no mention of *Hemp For Victory,* so it's just whispering in a hurricane.

[@uria2001]

@@shmarts8469 This is true. I could tell Kendra wanted to go in way harder on Jon, but I believe then you take away from the whole conversation. Nothing wrong with heated discussions, but it's often difficult to keep it civil once the balance of emotion vs logic get out of balance. I enjoyed the conversation. I do wish we could see more discussions like this from other individuals.

[@ShishakliAus]

It seems Jon is more comfortable pushing back against an activist than a bank CEO. Honestly think he should take a stern look at his biases based on this interview. Some introspection required.

[@nomad40025]

@@ShishakliAus I don't think that's Jon so much. I think activists are more willing to spar with Jon. The interview he just did with the Disney CEO is a good example. The CEO is giving edited responses to control investor perception, and not tank market values. Activists tend to be more honestly concerned about the actual issue at hand. If Jon pressed that CEO harder, he would never be able to get corporations involved in the discussions. Honestly, interviews like this are not in a corporation's best interest. They really don't have to do this level of communication at all in order to be profitable at this point.

[@JamesAChambers]

I was one of the people who posted a furious comment on the other writer's room video that it was said that recycling "doesn't work" and is even HARMFUL because of the plastics issue. Thank you Kendra for challenging this. You expressed my exact same concern that people won't parse this out and will start throwing away things like batteries and other metals / heavy metals that can not only be recycled very successfully but are actually dangerous *not* to recycle. Thank you Jon for listening and bringing people on like this to cut through some of this. I understand Jon's point and the original writer's point that it's being used as a false sense of security. That doesn't mean it doesn't work (outside the plastics issue). It's just a part of the solution. Other parts may be technological and of course as the episode covered a lot of is it political as well.

[@DennisMoore664]

That bugged the hell out of me and I've commented on it too. Those kind of reductive, blanket "it doesn't work" statements are rarely helpful and often counter-productive.

[@Janube]

I agree that Jon and his team *should* have addressed the nuance at the time, but I think it's pretty clear that the very VERY small minority of recycling cases that are represented by individuals recycling heavy metals and batteries was obviously not the point of the original discussion, which is that billion dollar industries made a deliberate play to reframe global health as a matter of individual virtue and contribution despite individuals accounting for such an incomprehensibly small amount of recyclable waste in America. It was part of a larger play to downplay climate change as an issue that we can solve as individuals by knuckling down and being mindful while corporations continue to be the vanguard in the war to make the earth uninhabitable (to humans). It's a valid item to note, but I think it's absolutely pedantic to frame is as a fundamental problem with the original argument.

[@JamesAChambers]

@@Janube The show is supposed to be a deep dive of these topics. It's not his argument that is the issue, it's the context. The point is that writers clip aired without even the context of the episode as just a short KZbin clip. People who don't understand how the writers room works will see this very differently than you are through the pure logical argument approach because you have the context. This discussion more than satisfied all my concerns and "made up" for it to me for what it's worth.

[@Mogthrasir1989]

Best interview so far. Kudos, Jon, and good work Kendra!

[@ajlbeer]

I feel so refreshed hearing an intelligent discussion about these issues.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

Agreed. Although I wasn’t surprised to scroll down to the comments and find the usual bickering…one step at a time I guess…

[@MrRossman2]

I've never heard of this woman before but I'm going to have to start following her. I don't say this about pretty much anyone, but I would love to have a conversation with her. She's obviously f**king brilliant and she seems to have opinions based on fact. A very rare quality now days.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

Same here. I was super impressed by her. I’ll have to look up her program and tune in a couple of times.

[@MalachiVanHaynes]

She's brilliant. Great conversation

[@stefaniegarcia6219]

Great interview. This is exactly what we need to hear in the mainstream media. Intelligent conversation. My brain feels nourished. Thanks, Jon. Thank you, Kendra ❤️

[@spencerguffey5078]

I was an 88M in the U.S. Army. Motor Transportation Operator. Other than my time in Iraq and Haiti... I did absolutely nothing productive in the military. Our trucks sat in the motor pool and essentially never moved. The u.s. military actually hired civilian contractors to move military vehicles from point A to B. We (soldiers with vehicles at our disposal, being paid by the u.s. military) played paper football alll day every day. It was insanity.

[@SilentBob731]

The Few. The Proud. The Cribbage League. 😉

[@robertnicholls9917]

I worked in aviation, same racket, contractor heaven alongside us. I was friends with a lot of those workers on the contractor side. They all made well above figures, not including per diem. Prices for simple screws were dollars, not pennies as it should have been. I was shocked to be a witness to all the fleecing. Americans are being played so badly. And, these same crooks will use the Ukrainian war to steal more from our society. I'm willing to bet the military budget for a single year will be close to 1 trillion.

[@hulk7861]

I feel smarter just having heard this lady make these excellent points.

[@quixoticPrancer]

This is the best guest I've seen on the show, period. The main show would be drastically improved by inviting guests like this one that can improve the quality of debate.

[@cancerino666]

Always suprise me Americans get more outraged about the idea of national oil production being owned by the government than the reality of being owned by a couple of dinasties.

[@hidesertroamer]

OMG, you are 100% dead on right!

[@SilentBob731]

Because they're terrified of "socialism" without have the first clue about what it really is.

[@larshassing3938]

Nationalize energy production (as you say), and let us include warfare material as well.. Just to see what happens, when profit is removed.. I am very curious.. And let's end planned obsolescence, and allow unrestricted right to repair..

[@rustywater3219]

@@larshassing3938 and cell towers and start exercising the Sherman antitrust act. Need to keep the bills away from special interest groups until after the vote or lobbyists would kill it.

[@Wangdoodle444]

@@SilentBob731 , socialism hasn’t worked right before; but you’ll get it right this time huh?….

[@davew2211]

Nuclear is the main option. Germany is phasing out nuclear and has barely eliminated emissions and has increased electricity rates due to renewables. France is high in nuclear and doing just fine. Nuclear can be built with political will and support. We really can’t transition without it, particularly if you want to develop a new hydrogen market (produced with nuclear) to offset emissions in industry, shipping and aviation.

[@sauravayyagari7606]

she said that that transition would take too long to raise capital, change sentiment, and develope nuclear infrastructure in countries without much nuclear already. Drinking water walking is better than milk running.

[@macsmich8273]

@@sauravayyagari7606 and she is wrong

[@Professicchio]

Not in many parts of the world, it isn't: there was a massive political debate in Italy years ago and seemed like many were agreeing to take up building nuclear power plants as a step forward. Then Fukushima happened and everyone was like: "oh shit, we are an active volcanic nation built on a major earthquake fault line, just like Japan", and suddenly everything was brushed under the carpet. Nuclear might be safer if you are in safe grounds but if you rely on hope that a volcano or massive earthquake won't hit nearby unannounced anytime , that's not a risk that anyone wants to remotely take no matter how safer those power plants claim to be, just ask anyone within 100 miles of Fukushima or Chernobyl.

[@nonyabisness6306]

@@Professicchio chernobyl was literally one of the first ever nuclear plants lacking the most basic shielding, which even at the time other plants got. similarly fukushima was hit by both an earthquake, which was fine and a tsunami. It was also very old and not properly secured, yet it still caused no deaths or great catastrophe. Nuclear is perfectly safe and has pretty much the lowest mortality rate per unit of power produced. We simple cannot transistion without it. We have the data from the last 10-20 years, all we end up doing is using more gas/coal. When we got rid of fossil we can work on reducing nuclear if we have to, but at least we'll have bought significant time.

[@dark_winter8238]

Exactly. Our battery tech would have to have crazy advancements for us to be able to use only solar and wind to account for current fossil fuel usage. You would have to have days if not a weeks worth of power stored up in case of major storms.

[@greatoak7661]

Kendra, I can't imagine how nervous you must have been talking to "The John Stewart". You did AMAZING and I wanted that said somewhere for you. I am proud of you for just doing this and I don't know you from anyone. Bravo!!!!! I love how you got comfortable and started to really rock and roll!!!! John, always love your stuff and I like that you did this too. Just another reason why we like you.

[@davidmarcelscomicbookrevie3548]

While the Problem the show is good, to me the real highlight are these discussions. It's so good to see Intelligent people having a discussion, who can disagree and yet keep a conversation going in a constructive way. My respect for Jon just grows with each person I watch him speak to.

[@rebeccafitzgibbon7955]

Thank you for this video. I was very frustrated with the previous recycling video for the same reasons Kendra was. I’m glad to see the topic covered again. I learned a lot.

[@coreyrosen3397]

"Humans: We react to crises better than we prevent crises." Jon Stewart best quote of the interview

[@brizzlefarmizzle]

That's engineering and science. Duh

[@newagain9964]

If you study human history. You would understand that’s not true at all. That mentality is more US false romanticism. Classic US EXCEPTIONALISM.

[@coreyrosen3397]

@@newagain9964 agree to disagree

[@TheHadi545]

@@newagain9964 On a political level certain issues that aren’t flashy enough simply do not get dealt with to the reasonable scope they should be. As soon as they create damning issues governments are forced to react.

[@coreyrosen3397]

@@TheHadi545 And isnt that stupid?

[@bunyslayer]

I really love your podcast Jon. Keep up the good work!

[@handarule]

She's awesome! Great discussion! I do get a little frustrated at the convo around cars though. On the one hand, I want great public transport, walkable residential areas in cities, etc. But, driving is a baked-in way of life for a lot of Americans, especially those out West in sprawling cities. Traffic sucks and we all want better options, but the idea that we'll go full no-car is not tenable. It also ignores that it's an actual enjoyable activity, even a past-time, for a lot of people. Personally I love driving, and through my life it's something I've done hand-in-hand with hanging out w/ my family or friends, visiting and exploring interesting places and outdoor areas, and even just as a therapeutic activity when I'm sad. I know I'm not alone in this, and though it would be good to move away from such car dependency, that's not going to culturally happen anytime soon unless you provide good replacements. I think East-coast city dwellers don't understand what it's like growing up and living tied to driving and road infrastructure. Road-tripping, sprawl, family drives, are part of the culture. Imo it's more practical rn to focus on EV cars, developing self-driving tech, smart roads, and especially other kinds of personal vehicles (electric bikes, smartcars, whatever) that can meet a lot of the same needs for cheaper and w/ less environmental burden. Also, she might not have liked living in rural VT and having to drive, but some people do like that life and will always choose that over urban density. Hopefully that remains a small fraction of our populace but the best way to maintain that is to make cities nice places to live (with nice, not scary transit systems) where people have enough space and freedom to breathe.

[@EngMadison]

I'd strongly recommend you look at other youtube channels like: Not Just Bikes City Beautiful City Nerd Alan Fisher The Podcast "War on Cars" Bicycle Dutch These channels (and others) help show that much of what you described can still exist, but that the US has botched transportation planning/engineering to a comically bad level. There are systemic reasons why driving seems like a cultural thing, when in only where it is today because the government decided to throw tons of money at making people (and keeping them) car dependent. I throw Bicycle Dutch in there simply because many of his videos of 'bike infrastructure heaven' don't come from dense downtown Amsterdam, they come from rural towns of a few thousand or a couple tens of thousands of people yet they have regular train service and a comprehensive bike network. We are not a car culture, we've simply thrown all other modes of transportation out the window and put all our eggs into one basket. Where that power structure has been pushed back on, you see a much more balanced mode split.

[@lunatik9696]

This is one of my favorite episodes. The speaker is clear, concise and pleasant to listen. I have seen her speak before on other KZbin clips. She raises many good points that I have not previously considered.

[@GeroldGarthcia]

Great discussion!