There may be political elements in the film, and several of the presidents who appear in a negative image are Republicans. The United States did not sign the "Kyoto Protocol" in time during the Clinton presidency. How come there is no criticism of the Democratic government? Of course, this is a film based on Gore's standpoint. It has such a clear opponent as the target, and does not need to involve the party. It is the nature of partisan politics to never forget to tease opponents and contribute to the party, and even a bit of a love-hate tone. It does not affect the persuasiveness of the film.
I mentioned it to my colleagues that day, and I went back to torture it at noon for them to watch. I really hope that more people can see this film and understand this problem.
China signed the "Kyoto Protocol" early, and China has now become the world's second largest emitter of carbon dioxide, and according to analysis will become the world's largest emitter around 2010, but in order to maintain the speed of economic development, China has repeatedly It is reiterated that carbon dioxide emission reduction should mainly be the obligation of developed countries, and China does not make specific commitments to limit emissions. Although the United States has not yet signed the "Kyoto Protocol", in view of the "decentralization" in the United States federal system, 358 mayors in the United States have signed the "U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement", "doing their own way" in their own cities. Kyoto Protocol". (See Drunkpiano's blog post "From Problem to Issue"). We really know the truth that words don't have to count!
Or in the words of drunkpiano: "But when the elevated water levels start to flood the city, it doesn't make a distinction between the east and the west of the Pacific."
View more about An Inconvenient Truth reviews
