3 ms·
I'm not sure I understand correctly. Do you want to say that the author unnecessarily relativized what he wrote about so far or that the last sentence is the ac
by _Microft 5y ago
I'm not sure I understand correctly. Do you want to say that the author unnecessarily relativized what he wrote about so far or that the last sentence is the actually interesting part and everything else was sort of a preface (which seems to be what "burying the lede" means [0], from what I can tell (as non-native speaker))
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bury_the_lede https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bury_the_lede
- scoofy 5y ago"Bury the lede" here was used semi-ironically. The article reads like something dramatic that we should be concerned about. However, the effects are not felt for 80+ years, so, presumably, that concern will evaporate for most people alive today, as they will certainly not experience these externalities. Thus at the end, the click-bait nature of this article is revealed, as the author notes at the end, that all this dire concern will simply not influence the vast majority of decisions, as concerns about climate change have for the last 30 years. I use "bury the lede" ironically as someone who read this article as something that may, finally, change the idiotic production and development patterns we've been following in the face the climate change threat, when instead, the real part of the story is that, no, no one will care.
- 11235813213455 5y agoI'm totally aware climate won't have time to deteriorate enough for my lifetime, but for me it's like a duty to minimize my environment footprint, I'm really close to nature, I eat foraged fruits (figs! currently) and not polluting (bike, local food, minimal consumption/buying) is like a nature bro-code that I can't break. Picking up plastics wastes is one of my ways to thank nature for its food, I know it sounds maybe "spiritual" for you, but it's really my mentality, and I live right inside a place of over-consumption (French code d'azur), so I'm a bit like a marginal there, so you're right in sating "almost no one will care", but I hope more people will see the point for such a lifestyle (healthy, simple, happy, and environment-scalable)
- scottLobster 5y agoThere is nothing scalable about eating foraged fruits/food. Modern populations would starve without modern agriculture
- 11235813213455 5y agoThere are many ways to eat more or less local food, via producers. If you take France for example, it could easily be self-sufficient in fruits/vegetables (currenly it's not because of how they destroyed the beautiful old agriculture (orchards, permacultures) to grow intensive monocultures of corn and things for industrial derived products instead (they are less efficient by yield/surface, and much more demanding in resources, more polluting, creates more erosion, kill life in the soil,..). Eating mostly plant-based food is definitely scalable https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets
- qsdfgd 5y agoNews flash! Population setup to be reliant on current system will need to change to use different systems.
- gdubya 5y agoGood work! Keep at it. You're not alone.
- tehjoker 5y agoI don't understand how someone can be born on a planet with the promise that the planet will be here and sustain us for potentially millions of years and be fine with trashing it to the point of ecological collapse simply because it'll get fully trashed slightly out of your expected lifespan.
- bserge 5y agoFantastic, YOLO. The next generation can deal with it.