115
HOW MUCH WORSE DOES CLIMATE CHANGE HAVE TO GET FOR LEAD BRAINS TO ACCEPT IT? 
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
115 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15914 readers
7 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
what he's saying is stupid bullshit but I cannot help but respect it more than hand-wringing liberals who claim to care and then work against any attempt to confront capital
I'm exhausted of "brutal honesty" and don't give it any additional consideration if it's the same result, just with brute flavor.
Under no circumstances do you “have to hand it to them”
best I can do is "gets put after the other major candidate in the post-revolutionary line for the gallows"
I think you can make an argument that pig-headed open climate science denial like that Trump spews is less dangerous than the more sophisticated and deceptive climate science denial that western liberals promote, where they claim to "believe the science" but all they do is to give a few handouts to the EV sector and maybe fund a few bazinga carbon capture projects in the hope that they can do green capitalism.
With the former it is easy to see that it is complete bullshit and that you have to look elsewhere for a sensible answer but the latter looks superficially sensible and convinces a lot of people who genuinely care about climate change that the adults in the room are stepping up and that a bazinga wizard will fix it.
Again, under no circumstances do you have to hand it to them.
We need to be able to criticize two things at once