What most people don’t know is that decades later, he went to a lot of work to try to undo the damage he caused and advocate for civil rights. The problem was, the damage had been done a lot of it. Very real people have had their lives injured. He egged on voters into bigotry longer than they needed to be.
I can’t help but feel that the last 10 years or so, we’ve been watching the same thing. All of this is going to age like milk. Future (and even current) generations suffering (or who will soon suffer) the effects of the climate crisis, are going to universally find moments like tonight universally outrageous.
History won’t be written by baby Boomers. It’s going to be written by the gen alpha kids who will be the adults when we’re old and gone.
I find it to be outrageous now, no need for future generations looking back to fulfill that prophecy. What’s most outrageous is that I’m pretty sure they all know the truth, it’s just politically unfashionable for them to admit it.
I wonder if they have any sense of how history will judge them and if it hunts them at night. They are probably to mutch involved in their daily power struggles but I would like to think that their time of reflection will come. Not every politician can be such an ignorant narcist like the orange clown, right?
I can’t help but feel that the last 10 years or so
This climate denialism has been going on much longer than that. For as long as there’s been profit in damaging the environment, there’s denialism about that damage. In many ways our whole capitalistic western culture is and has always been environmental denialism … it’s the cultural air we’ve been breathing since we were all born.
And yes … completely agree with you … our, and our parents’ generation are going to age like fine milk … we’re going to look toddlers that had technology and the ability to great things right in our hands but instead shat our pants and broke everything we touched because of stupidity we had not yet grown out of, because a better parent should not have given us this technology yet until we’d grown up more.
My personal take on this is that all the generations of modernity will be lumped together in this way as the period in which humanity’s reach truly exceeded its grasp. Modern warfare, Fascism, Nuclear weapons, modern capitalism, the internet and mass-(dis-)information. Collectively, we’ll look pretty foolish and dumb when looking back, like a people that didn’t know how to actually think about what we were doing collectively.
It’ll also be interesting to think about our cultural thinking process struggled to keep up with our technological progress. The comical image I have in my mind is a toddler quickly going from grabbing a swallowable piece of Lego, to a knife, to an electric saw to a lightsaber before the babysitter realises that they really need to intervene. And so that toddler will grow up without a left foot always wondering how in the hell the world let them have a lightsaber as a 2 year old.
A lake in a remote location provides pristine, clean water to a local village, for free. Someone buys the lake, builds fences around it, begins packing the water in bottles and selling them. Thanks to this valiant entrepreneur, the GDP has grown.
Direct climate change has been a past couple of decades issue, but damaging nature for profit has existed for as long as we have had the tools to do so.
To be fair, Desantis immediately interrupted and said they weren’t going to raise their hands “like children”. No candidate would raise their hand after a comment like that. All their specific answers were certainly not climate friendly, but they are at least a little bit more nuanced than the title implies
That definitely still demonstrates a ride or die mentality. If one sleaseball can sway the room in such a way where than budging against it would lead to ridicule, that still shows the sort of internal pressure there is to tow the party line no matter what
It’s honestly like someone comes up to you and tells you that you have to win class president for the local kindergarten.
You’d love to talk about stuff like human rights or healthcare but you know that if you want to win the election you need to promise them longer naps and candy every Monday.
Don’t bury the lede! One outright called it a hoax.
“I’m the only candidate on stage who isn’t bought and paid for, so I can say this,” Ramaswamy said, though he caught some shade. “Climate change is a hoax … The reality is more people are dying of bad climate change policies than they are of actual climate change.”
Because accepting the truth means accepting that unless we take radical, almost certainly financially painful action, we're all fucked. It's easier to pretend that everything is ok. At least until we start starving.
I said much the same earlier today on another thread. Lib or con, too many are not willing to sacrifice to prevent what is coming. It’s easy to pawn this off on just the cons, but take a close look at your own surroundings and your lib friends and see who is walking the walk.
The vast majority of the pain and sacrifice would be on the rich—they’re the ones who own bunker-fuel-burning cargo ships and fly everywhere on private jets—so there isn’t much reason for the rest of us to be overly worried.
I feel the opposite. Most environmental issues affect the poor. The rich have much more flexibility than the rest of us.
You can’t pick up farmland and move it. As climate zones shift and hit those mega monoculture farms (see rice as a current example) we see increased risk of famine. The rich can go somewhere less affected. They can import their own food. They can crank up their AC. They can swim in their pools. Can you move or double your cooling bill?
Once famine hits, you will see mass migration. See how well we deal with that now across the world. Rich people don’t plead for asylum. Why do you think they hoard that money? They don’t need it now. But when push comes to shove, that money carries a ton of weight.
We dont really know what areas will get hit either, because environmental variable are hard to predict. Countries that fight refugees today could be asking those very people for help tomorrow.
They were saying that it is the rich would would feel the sacrifice IF we were to actually try and do something. They are the ones who would have to change the most. They weren’t implying that the rich will suffer the effects of climate change more than the poor.
Yes, top down solutions are required for significant change. The more time we let go by, the harsher the austerity is going to be when we have no choice.
Paper straws and bicycles won’t solve the climate crisis. What my lib friends and I are doing doesn’t really matter when just a handful of entities make up so much more of the environmental impact.
We could stop those entities…if it weren’t for the cons constantly blocking any attempt to help the greater good.
More specifically, not with that disingenuous attitude that implies giving folks bicycles and changing nothing else, trying to shame them into using a mode that’s worse for them in order to altruistically help everybody else. Of-fucking-course that’s never gonna work!
Instead, what actually has to change is the zoning laws that shape the built environment the bicycles are operate in. We have to stop limiting density and mandating parking requirements, which not only physically force destinations farther apart (putting fewer within walking or biking distance) and cause the space between to be filled with car-infested asphalt (making walking and biking unpleasant), but also subsidize driving by forcing an oversupply of parking, driving down the price.
Removing the regulations and allowing developers to build as compactly as the market would dictate would cause people to freely choose bicycling because it would become more convenient than driving, and that is what would help solve the climate crisis!
Add comment