Robin Eckersley argues that the three pillars of post-Cold War US grand strategy (securing US economic and military dominance, promoting a stable capitalist global economy based on US ideals and promoting the spread of liberal democracy) have not been formulated in ways compatible with a low US carbon footprint. True or false?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Eckersley contends that the three pillars of post–Cold War U.S. grand strategy are structurally incompatible with achieving a low U.S. carbon footprint.

1. Relevant knowledge points and concepts
- The three pillars: (a) securing U.S. economic and military dominance, (b) promoting a stable capitalist global economy based on U.S. ideals, and (c) promoting the spread of liberal democracy.  
- Carbon lock‑in, path dependency, and the energy intensity of military power and growth‑oriented capitalism.  
- Trade, investment, and security policies shape infrastructure and consumption patterns that determine emissions trajectories.

2. Step‑by‑step reasoning
- Pillar (a): Military and economic dominance requires global power projection (bases, fleets, air operations) and secure access to energy supplies. The U.S. military is a major fuel consumer; maintaining global force posture incentivizes continued reliance on liquid fuels and an energy logistics system that is hard to decarbonize quickly.  
- Pillar (b): Promoting a capitalist global economy emphasizes growth, open markets, and investment flows that favor carbon‑intensive industries (fossil fuel extraction, global supply chains, heavy manufacturing). Growth imperatives and trade liberalization increase production, transport, and consumption — raising emissions.  
- Pillar (c): Spreading liberal democracy is often pursued through policies that support market liberalization and integration into global markets, which align with consumption patterns and infrastructure investment that lock in high emissions (roads, airports, fossil‑fuel plants).  
- Together, these pillars create institutional incentives and geopolitical priorities that deprioritize stringent domestic emissions limits and international climate constraints.

3. Calculations
- Not applicable; argument is structural and policy‑based rather than numerical.

4. Why the correct answer is correct
- Because each pillar creates reinforcing political, economic, and military incentives that favor carbon‑intensive systems, Eckersley argues they were not formulated with compatibility with a low carbon footprint in mind.

5. Why the other option is incorrect
- Choosing “False” would claim the pillars are compatible with low emissions; that contradicts the structural analysis above showing systemic incentives toward high emissions.

6. Conclusion
- Therefore the correct answer is True, matching the provided answer.

类似问题

Is the following statement true or false? In the products of methylation-hydrolysis, every -OH group corresponds to the position of a glycosidic bond in the starting polysaccharide.

Which of the follwoing structures represents amylopectin?

Which of the following is true about an aldopentose?I. It is a monosaccharide.II. It contains a CHO groupIII. It is a disaccharide.IV. It is an oligosaccharide.

For stock A, we have 𝛽 𝑖 = 0.70. Suppose the expected market risk premium next year is 9% and the risk-free rate is 3%. What is the expected return of this stock based on the CAPM? (Please answer in % and round to 2 decimal places. If the answer is 8.057%, then in the box, write 8.06)

The following graph shows the Security Market Line in the current economy. If a stock has a β of 1.2, what is the expected return of this stock based on the CAPM? (Please answer in % and round to 2 decimal places. If the answer is 8.057%, then in the box, write 8.06)

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单