Really not a big fan of “Hitler was innocent” no matter what “joke” you add after it. It makes light of fascism without making any kind of point.
This kind of talk reminds me of How to Radicalise a Normie. It starts with edgy jokes and ironically saying things like “hitler did nothing wrong”, and they slowly normalise that language until they take over a space and can use it for recruiting.
I don’t know if that’s what’s going on here, but you don’t personally need to intentionally be doing fascist entryism in order for fascists to make use of it.
The thing is billionaires will always use more resources than you. They will have more stuff. It’ll have more houses. They will have boats, private planes, huge mansions, and more money than they know what to do with. They will always use more resources than you. If your whole statement is we shouldn’t try to solve global warming because some people are rich, and we’re doomed to all die. And by the way, The billionaires will have a nice air-conditioned bunker while the rest of us die.
I’m all for trying to solve wealth inequality, but it shouldn’t get in the way of solving a major environmental disaster.
Well, I can’t help but notice it’s mostly those billionaires and the people who work for them who are telling us there’s a climate issue and WE need to solve it while they continue to fly everywhere on their private jets and buy more waterfront mansions they tell us will be underwater in 10 years.
So IDK man… I’m certainly not a climate scientist but something doesn’t add up here.
More people than billionaires are telling you there’s a climate issue. Scientists are, normal people are, etc. It’s the biggest environmental issue of our lifetimes. And there are some celebrities that are also trying to use their popularity to promote the message to get the government to create a set of rules that will actually impact out much CO2 we’re putting into our atmosphere. The right-wing talking heads have found that it’s really effective to point at them and say “LOOK! They have big houses! They fly around in private jets! They use more resources that 100 of you normal folks, therefore we shouldn’t do anything.”
The reality is that they’re using more resources than 100 of us normal folks, but there are 100k of us normal folks to each of them so we make a much more significant impact on the climate than they do. And yes, lets make the laws affect them also. But the “they’re flying around in jets” talking point is lame. They’re going to be flying around in jets no matter what. They’re going to have big houses no matter what. So lets make them have lots of solar panels on their big houses or make flying around in private jets more expensive. That’s just a reason to make the laws affect them also, it’s NOT a reason to do nothing and let the world burn.
Sorry, but you’re putting the cart before the horse there. More people than billionaires are telling us there’s a climate issue BECAUSE celebrities are using their clout to promote this issue. And most of these people, including the celebrities, aren’t climate scientists either, they just parrot stuff they’ve heard from people they trust.
So you only heard about climate change when celebs like Taylor Swift started promoting it? The writing has been on the wall for decades (from scientists) and we’ve been hearing about it for that amount of time. If you think that the only reason you know about it is from celebs then apparently they were needed in order to reach you.
If your whole statement is we shouldn’t try to solve global warming because some people are rich
I don’t think that’s what they’re saying at all. Any solution to climate change is incomplete if it doesn’t also address inequality and overconsumption
Well, one version of ‘solving inequality’ would be making sure the other 99% create as much emissions as that 1%, which taking your statistics at face value would be a massive bump in emissions.
There’s no such thing as bad or good taste, when it’s limited to one’s choices.
When you are calling your own taste good, or some other person’s taste good just because, and make it something social - that’ll always be bad taste.
Yeah, and market doesn’t have anything to do with taste.
About the photo - if not for that horrible floor, I’d like it. Should have made it solid dark gray.
EDIT: LOL, I see a few people strongly disagree with the fact that it’s really badtaste to pretend that taste is not subjective.
That’s actually the only thing determining “bad” and “good” taste - when the thing’s appearance clearly shows that the author thought their taste is “good” by association alone, like Disney Star Wars or maybe by imitating a style which is “good”.
There are, of course, things like laws of composition and colors chosen etc, but these are still not objective and differ for various kinds of art.
lemmy.today
Top