3 ms·

so the presentation leaves a bit to be desired but you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. for one i don't think this poster is is presenting a gover

by em-bee 2y ago

so the presentation leaves a bit to be desired but you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. for one i don't think this poster is is presenting a government mandate but i believe it's a demand from people to the government to build like this (it's from the climate action museum, which, as far as i could tell is not supported by government) likewise it is not about forcing people to stay home but demanding the right for people to do so and live their daily life without having to travel every day. the title "stay home!" is an unfortunate choice. but to be fair, you also have to read the whole title: "your most radical move! stay home!" which clearly suggests that staying home is a choice you make (just like many of us refuse to return to work in the office) and not something forced on you from the outside. if you read anything else then you either miss the point or you are intentionally twisting it. do you think fighting against neighborhoods like this is going to help you prevent that dystopia that you seem to be afraid of? negative thinking is not going to help us make the world better. a commenter above mentions paris. i can share the exact same experience from vienna. literally. that's what we are talking about.

em-bee 2y ago
side note: when i lived in singapore i actually felt what it means not to be able to travel outside of city borders. i mean, yeah, you could travel, but you had to check a border crossing point, change currency, etc... it felt like a trap. china during covid was similar. just replace passport controls with vaccination checks every time you travel from one city to another. i believe many of the city states and islands would feel the same. even new zealand felt like that when your goal was to be among people. it is perfect to get away from people though.
avazhi 2y ago
I understand a lot of what you're saying, but the fact is that radical anything - whether it's the radical left or right, radical environmentalists, radical feminists, etc., are all ultimately trying to move their grievances and solutions into the mainstream. Just because the makers of the placard admit 'staying home' would be radical right now doesn't mean that they want it to stay that way - indeed political issues to some extent always begin as radical ideas and by definition those that are eventually accepted by a society are no longer seen as radical when they are accepted. You might try to say this is just a slippery slope argument, but they are already advocating for something they (and you) admit is radical - the only caveat is that they qualify it as being radical for now. Clearly if a few radical environmentalists 'stay home!' there isn't going to be a dent in any metric that these people swear by - staying home will only begin to affect things if many or most people do it, whether by choice or by force, and that's the kind of wholesale societal change that I find absolutely bonkers and terrifying.

by em-bee 2y ago

em-bee 2y ago

side note: when i lived in singapore i actually felt what it means not to be able to travel outside of city borders. i mean, yeah, you could travel, but you had to check a border crossing point, change currency, etc... it felt like a trap. china during covid was similar. just replace passport controls with vaccination checks every time you travel from one city to another. i believe many of the city states and islands would feel the same. even new zealand felt like that when your goal was to be among people. it is perfect to get away from people though.

avazhi 2y ago

I understand a lot of what you're saying, but the fact is that radical anything - whether it's the radical left or right, radical environmentalists, radical feminists, etc., are all ultimately trying to move their grievances and solutions into the mainstream. Just because the makers of the placard admit 'staying home' would be radical right now doesn't mean that they want it to stay that way - indeed political issues to some extent always begin as radical ideas and by definition those that are eventually accepted by a society are no longer seen as radical when they are accepted. You might try to say this is just a slippery slope argument, but they are already advocating for something they (and you) admit is radical - the only caveat is that they qualify it as being radical for now. Clearly if a few radical environmentalists 'stay home!' there isn't going to be a dent in any metric that these people swear by - staying home will only begin to affect things if many or most people do it, whether by choice or by force, and that's the kind of wholesale societal change that I find absolutely bonkers and terrifying.