3 ms·
Why are you booing him; he's right. While the article immediately addresses the acceptance of both awful and fantastic changes, it doesn't address our effect o
by mandmandam 4y ago
Why are you booing him; he's right.
While the article immediately addresses the acceptance of both awful and fantastic changes, it doesn't address our effect on the other species of the planet - which has been rather unambiguously horrific. On a scale that's basically impossible to comprehend without lifetimes of study across diverse fields.
This needs to be addressed more. Every hour of every day, until we have accountability for the people responsible and genuine changes.
I want our future to be one that respects the biosphere and all species, not just one. It's not just altruistic either - we've lost so much already, and people don't even know.
- slothtrop 4y ago> It's not just altruistic either Then it's factored in to the "is the world better for humans" category
- Nevermark 4y agoYes, "the world is better" should ideally include the impacts of today's decisions, not just today's direct response to previous factors. But the example of childhood death statistics doesn't include any analysis of how today's actions are setting up future childhood safety issues regarding plastics, climate change, overfishing, water shortages, etc.