If left-wing extremism continues to flourish in parts which have natural resources of minerals, the climate for investment would certainly be affected.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Climate change could produce a lot of misery and waste without necessarily leading to large-scale armed conflict, which depends more on ideology and bad governance than on resource scarcity.
Apocalyptic thinking happens on the left as well as on the right, and in environmentalism, that's a terrible approach to take. Because it isn't true.
Around the world, climate change is an existential threat - but if we harness the opportunities inherent in addressing climate change, we can reap enormous economic benefits.
If we do not change our negative habits toward climate change, we can count on worldwide disruptions in food production, resulting in mass migration, refugee crises and increased conflict over scarce natural resources like water and farm land. This is a recipe for major security problems.
I'm not a left-wing person. I'm just a person interested in the sustainability of my country.
The environmental movement doesn't have many deserters and has a high level of recruitment. Eventually, there will be open war.
Like the canary in the coal mine, the climate changes already evident in the Arctic are a call to action.
Further devastation of the air, land and sea is obviously a very real possibility, unless the attitudes of politicians and all who irresponsibly exploit our natural resources change significantly in the very near future and all collaborate and sacrifice for the good of the planet.
There are jobs to be created on both sides of the climate argument. Whether we are investing in oil or sun, coal or wind, gas or algae, the economy will be stimulated by the investment. The economy, unlike each of us, is not swayed by ideology.
Right-wing extremism is all about patience. That is, until it makes its move, and then it is sudden and explosive.