this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2023
1460 points (97.7% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2824 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The world has experienced its hottest day on record, according to meteorologists.

The average global temperature reached 17.01C (62.62F) on Monday, according to the US National Centres for Environmental Prediction.

The figure surpasses the previous record of 16.92C (62.46F) - set back in August 2016.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I disagree.

People need to be angry. We're being murdered and we must defend ourselves.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you have all the moral justification of a person fighting for his life here? That's a pretty significant level of moral authority to wield.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, pretty much anything goes then right? Like, if I crush a puppy's skull with my foot it's a horrible thing to do. But if that was the only way I could avoid dying people would understand.

So basically being in fear of your life means "I get to do anything to anyone and it's justifiable"

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, no, I'm not that greedy for life. After a certain point it's not worth it and I'll just make it quick and painless. Life isn't always preferable to death, I'd need to be able to live with myself afterwards!

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn I am. I’ll rip the belly out of a live kitten if it’s truly the only way to live. I’ve been afraid for my life before and I never blame anyone for doing what it takes to survive.

What I take issue with is the level of certainty that such an abstract, complex thing is the same class of threat as someone firing a gun at you or a lion charging you.

Elevating long chains of logical reasoning, and not applying a mitigating layer of uncertainty to each step to reflect the possibility of mistakes or misinterpretations, so that full-on motivation comes out the other end, strikes me as unwise.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You're treating the threat as something abstract, like there aren't specific people who are to blame for destroying the world. As if it's no one's fault, so violence falls on anyone in the name of survival. Even puppies and kittens lol

I think we have to treat climate change as the same class of threat as someone shooting at us, and that means identifying the shooters and .. "disarming" them.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But is abstracted away. That’s what abstract means. You think some specific person is out there endangering your life. If they are about to murder you, then I’d support you literally killing them. I’m for self defense. I just think it needs to be a clear and present danger to be justified.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There are specific people who are, together, responsible. The oil execs that chose to cover up the truth about global warming, the meat industry execs who did the same, the hucksters that sell the lie of carbon sequestration and ethanol fuel and hydrogen fuel as solutions, the investors that continue to pump money into oil exploration projects, and the politicians that have stopped any meaningful progress from happening. There are, in fact, individual people that we can point to and say "they are the problem" - it's not abstract.

We have enemies and they're killing us.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What about me? I drive a car, have a carbon footprint, etc.

How is my own (and your) responsibility for global warming different than theirs?

And don’t say “they profit off it”. You and I both profit off it too. We live in a veritable heaven compared to those in pre-industrial times. We inherited and enjoy enormous wealth that can be traced to the burning of fossil fuels.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Our contribution is miniscule compared to our enemies, and we only contribute what we have to because they sabotaged all alternatives! They killed public transportation, they made neighborhoods and cities unwalkable, they turned cyclists (like me!) into 2nd class citizens of the road, and more.

I'd sell my car if I could. I can't and it's their fuckin fault!

We are not the same as them. They are the enemy and they must be stopped before they kill us all.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But is our contribution minuscule compared to theirs? Like let’s say one man sells (an equal amount of) gasoline to a thousand people. Is that one man now contributing 1000x more to greenhouse gas emissions than any one of those people?

Does a given unit of carbon emission get counted multiple times at each step of the production chain from extraction to emission?

Like if 1 lb of carbon is extracted as crude oil, and then that 1 lb is involved in say five monetary transactions, with the processing followed by the eventual consumption and release into the atmosphere, does each person in that chain now have a carbon footprint that increases by one pound?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

But is our contribution minuscule compared to theirs? Like let’s say one man sells (an equal amount of) gasoline to a thousand people. Is that one man now contributing 1000x more to greenhouse gas emissions than any one of those people?

But that's not all he's doing!

He then takes the revenue from selling gasoline and uses it to bribe politicians and hire lobbyists and invest in more oil refining/exploration; he's making the problem even worse.

Meanwhile, the people he sells the gasoline to don't have any real choice but to buy it. They need to work to live, and they can't get to work without gas because Mr. Gasoline destroyed public transportation infrastructure.

Stop trying to flatten everything down to only the carbon footprint (a metric made by the oil industry to absolve themselves on responsibility). They used that money from selling gasoline to convince you that you are equally to blame for climate change as billionaire oil families and it's absolute nonsense.

[–] ArcticCircleSystem@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And this is the sort of thinking someone comes to when they don't take power dynamics into account. ~Strawberry

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

What I’m responding to is the sort of thing that arises when people place all the blame for a problem on others without consulting their own responsibility.

You want to know about power dynamics? When I order a shirt from Amazon it arrives at my door the next day. No king of history has had the kind of power that I wield, except maybe the new King Charles.

I can speak to my network of people no matter how distant we are. That’s power. I can go 110 mph by pushing my foot to the floor. That’s power. I can see inside my own body and detect tumors before they ever exist on the surface. More power.

People these days are powerful. But it’s tempting to pretend one has no power, because we know that power comes with responsibility. When a person wants to avoid responsibility, they will craft a story of how powerless they are.

There’s nothing admirable about pretending not to have power. It’s just a way of hiding from those who might judge how you choose to use it.