In terms of cursed machinations of the bourgeoisie, it’s the opposite direction. There’s a faction of the bourgeoisie who actually want climate change. And I don’t mean this in terms of spez thinking he can survive in a bunker in New Zealand or oil companies that don’t give a shit about climate change. But there’s a whole faction who sees climate change opening up new markets that they can exploit through disaster capitalism. There’s also a technocratic ecofascist faction who sees climate change as the great scythe that will cull the undesirables of the human population (ie everyone in the Global South and the poor in the imperial core).

The really ghoulish possibility is if some fascist capitalist ghoul understands enough of Marxism to think they can solve the tendency of the rate of profit to fall through destruction of constant capital. The tendency of the rate of profit to fall is partially because the organic composition of capital shifts from variable capital to constant capital, so by destroying enough constant capital, organic composition will once again be dominated by variable capital and the rate of profit will rise. Of course, destruction of constant capital means destruction of infrastructure, factories, tech centers, and all signs of modern life. The means of doing so is through world war. You already saw this in the aftermath of WWII where the rate of profit actually went up.

“Nuclear winter” is bad science and is basically rejected by modern climatologists.

Current atmospheric data has shown that while large fires can have a cooling effect it only lasts up to 2 months as the smoke settles and there is no reason to think more smoke would fall slower. Any cooling effect is short lived and dwarfed by the rise in temperatures from the increased atmospheric CO2.

Worst of all “nuclear” is just thrown in as a scare word. There’s no reason that nukes must be the catalyst for massive fire storms and no guarantee that a nuclear war would even cause them.

You’re giving a lot of credit to Western politicians

If they wanted to do geoengineering they would have other ways of doing it that wouldn’t come with so many loose ends.

Setting up a nuclear war in a place this important to global logistics and energy supply would be bad for business and could risk escalating into something that would harm these ghouls personally.

It would be a lot easier to manufacture consent for “peaceful discharges of nuclear energy” in the Sahara or somewhere if that is what they wanted.

this assumes the western bourgeoisie give a fuck about climate change, which they do not and never will

Death to America

How about we “trim” the western billionaire class

Don’t give them ideas

If it makes you feel any better, during the Deep Water Horizon incident, they had experts come in from various fields come to the White House to propose “novel soltions” to cap the well. One of my professors was on a team that pitched using a tactical nuclear warheas to collapse the well. They were basically laughed out of the White House. That was a different admin, but still.

That’s a Futurama joke

We should be more skeptical towards conspiracy theories. We tend to hold two very conflicting realities at once.

The neolibs are incredibly incompetent failchildren that can’t think further beyond than tonight’s dinner. This is why they fail to consider the consequences of their actions obviously, often failing to consider just what will happen 6 months down the line.

But also they’re deeply cunning and tactical minded, coming up with complex theories on how to tackle deep important long term subjects like climate change which they really suddenly give a shit about lol.