3 ms·

I don't want to be inflammatory and am genuinely curious: if I'm understanding you correctly, you are frustrated that this conversation alienates people like re

I don't want to be inflammatory and am genuinely curious: if I'm understanding you correctly, you are frustrated that this conversation alienates people like republicans, is that right? What is a way to have a productive conversation and move towards meaningful action on this issue with "everybody who voted for trump or itemized their taxes or whatever"? What are the values to appeal to or what is the language that doesn't alienate?

wikitopian 4y ago
Climate Change should be approached as an engineering problem that threatens everybody and not packaged as a "social justice" problem against the affluent. One could as easily frame climate change as a problem caused by the global south industrializing and achieving higher living standards, leaving larger carbon footprints. I'm not a republican. I'm a proponent of science, technology, and climate journalism that focuses on education instead of polarization.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  If all the cat owners refused to believe in climate change, you'd see a lot of "climate change will kill more dogs in hot cars" type stories because the dog vote would become more valuable. It's simple political calculus. Many of the people involved may prefer terrapins or tarantulas as pets, but if the cat-lovers have ruled themselves out, then anyone else who cares about animals will be courting the large dog vote in order to get things done on other issues. The cat-lovers then saying "See it was all about dogs all along" just further isolates them and hands more power to the non cat-lovers. As long as the cat lovers don't start a war based on this paranoia it's almost as good an outcome for society as them accepting the truth for climate change believers, and an extra bonus for dog lovers who get their democratic desires met because they are able to collaborate with people who disagree with them on some things but want to work together on climate/energy.

wikitopian 4y ago

Climate Change should be approached as an engineering problem that threatens everybody and not packaged as a "social justice" problem against the affluent. One could as easily frame climate change as a problem caused by the global south industrializing and achieving higher living standards, leaving larger carbon footprints. I'm not a republican. I'm a proponent of science, technology, and climate journalism that focuses on education instead of polarization.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
If all the cat owners refused to believe in climate change, you'd see a lot of "climate change will kill more dogs in hot cars" type stories because the dog vote would become more valuable. It's simple political calculus. Many of the people involved may prefer terrapins or tarantulas as pets, but if the cat-lovers have ruled themselves out, then anyone else who cares about animals will be courting the large dog vote in order to get things done on other issues. The cat-lovers then saying "See it was all about dogs all along" just further isolates them and hands more power to the non cat-lovers. As long as the cat lovers don't start a war based on this paranoia it's almost as good an outcome for society as them accepting the truth for climate change believers, and an extra bonus for dog lovers who get their democratic desires met because they are able to collaborate with people who disagree with them on some things but want to work together on climate/energy.