>I would believe that more if it weren't constantly done in front of TV cameras. This is about drawing attention to yourself because you can't convince someone

>I would believe that more if it weren't constantly done in front of TV cameras. This is about drawing attention to yourself because you can't convince someone with rational arguments. I don't disagree. I don't think the two are mutually-exclusive. The public performance is very much part of the quest for transcendence, and has its equivalents in the other forms of radical ideology. > Ultimately it's technology, rather than tantrums, that will determine how food is grown and factories are powered. Quite. And to your point, the interesting question now becomes: why are they throwing tantrums instead of useful work? Every theory I have seen falls into one of two buckets: 1. They're incapable of it, or being undermined 2. It's not actually a solution they're after I think it's overwhelmingly #2. Moreover, I think the thing they're actually looking for is exactly transcendent meaning. >fertilizer is made from natural gas P.S.: Is this true? I can see how it could be, but I was not aware of this. That's quite ironic, if indeed true.