you can also tag people on Lemmy, or at least I can. look for the About User menu then “Add Tag” or “Tag user” from their profile
- 0 Posts
- 34 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 20th, 2024
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
1·2 months agoappreciate the rec, I’ve been a patreon to Climate Town for years and already listened to that episode of CDH…
my point still stands. “too much” is a spectrum, my opinion likely differs significantly from most people, including Rollie’s. i lean towards the Daniel Quinn side of environmental ethics, which definitely places more than just fat over consuming Americans in the category of unsustainable cultures.
(I’m not saying this is my personal opinion so don’t roast me plz):
it’s not that there are too many people.
it’s that there are too many people living under a regime that compels them to wantonly consume, pollute, and generally destroy the ecosystem in favor of the sole benefit of a miniscule number of oligarchs
in other words, the planet has the carrying capacity to sustain all of us theoretically, but not practically as things are today, at least not if humans continue living according to capitalist hyper consumptive individualism.
so yeah, there are too many people - unless we effectively reprogram all of modern culture to embrace a sustainable and pro environmental ethics… which you and I know, isn’t going to happen.
QED: too many people.
note: this is different from the other commenters take because it’s not making claims about human nature as being inherently bad. it’s just claiming that the system/culture people are born into is bad and does in fact impose artificial limitations on the capacity of the planet to support diverse ecosystems
8·2 months agoI’m extremely skeptical corningware contains lead which can come off… it’s sealed, ultra hard ceramic. that’s not how people have historically gotten lead contamination. there’s probably more lead in the soil in their front yard than in every piece of corningware in the house…
please don’t destroy these, just donate them to a thrift shop so sensible folks can use them as intended. many of those vintage ceramics are collectibles, more importantly they are infinity reusable.
262·2 months agothey probably mean “culturally progressive”, as in, woke leaning. bombs with rainbows painted on them.
the US was only very briefly controlled by a progressive govt and it took a great depression and threats of mob violence against the ruling class to get that much.
3·2 months agomaybe. it might also be that most of the damage is the result of a few particular bad actors… arguably a large amount of the runaway environmental destruction we’ve witnessed is the accumulated result of a very small portion of the population being allowed to do whatever the fuck they want whenever the fuck they want for ~200 years?
we could test this theory out, empirically. I propose an experiment where we, um, neutralize, the top 1% who directly facilitate eco-cide in pursuit of corporate profits and then we’ll see if nature improves.
5·2 months agoi think tik tok might be in a position where they must sell in order to continue serving content to American users
The order was announced as White House officials believed they were nearing a deal for the app’s operations to be spun off into a new company based in the U.S. and owned and operated by a majority of American investors,
the extension only happened because after the TikTok CEO, Shou Chew, threw a big party for right wing influencers during Trump’s record breaking $200M
bribe acceptance partyinauguration, Trump mysteriously halted the order (despite being signed into law) to ban the app.from the article:
Top TikTok executives reportedly rubbed shoulders with American tech leaders and handed out business cards at an elite pre-inauguration donor event on Sunday featuring members of the Trump administration, as the app’s future in the U.S. remains uncertain.
Tiktok executives including CEO Shou Chew and vice president Michael Beckerman were reportedly on hand at the event, which President Donald and First Lady Melania Trump hosted at the National Building Museum in Washington. They joined a reported guestlist including Vice President JD Vance, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and conservative megadonor Miriam Adelson.
geeze, it’s almost like the tech oligarchs told Trump to pause the ban until they could negotiate a way to profit more from acquisition of TikTok (or a newly created US based subsidiary that Bezos is trying to invest in) than by outright banning users access to it, cold turkey.
1·3 months agodeleted by creator
people keep using this ‘interrupting your enemy’ phrase incorrectly and it’s really tiresome.
it’s like, “hey, your enemy is destroying your country, do something!” and braindead meme junkies are like “well actually, don’t interrupt your enemy…” smh
ig it gives them permission to do nothing… it grants validation for passivity.
me missing your point doesn’t make your arguments correct. you are factually mistaken in your framing.
Life doesn’t give an F about balance
you speak with the confident wrongness of someone who has no scientific understanding of natural cycles, equilibriiums, self-limiting reproductive rates, ecology, or biology. have you heard of chemistry? equilibriums?
you are confusing a linguistic object , the word “balance” (like from an Oxford dictionary) with empirically observable, falsifiable hypotheses which are well established in environmental science. humans are late arrivals to the millennia of life systems on earth, and the first thing they did was begin destroying balanced ecosystems to grow surplus foods, exert population pressures on other species, reshape rivers and lakes, clearcut forests, and general terraform the shit out of everything, other creatures be damned.
your comment suggests a stunningly anthropocentric hubris and a total ignorance to eons of geological time preceding homo sapiens which humans came along and completely fucked by rapidly terra forming the planet. go tell a black rhino or a dodo that only humans care about balance.
humans cause imbalance in nature, it’s literally our whole thing we do. transform the environment by whatever means possible, dominate other life forms to extinction if we feel like it, overcome natural limits or push others to extreme boundaries.
wealthy people are not a monolith. some, those with advance warning (insider advantage) will benefit while others lose out. this is not just about rich vs poor, it’s also ultra rich vs ultra rich, cabals of powerful elites vying for control of global markets in the chaotic aftermath of global financial restructuring.
in addition to buy low, sell high… perhaps even more lucrative, the crash will be used as an excuse for another massive corporate bailout benefiting the wealthiest business owners and will accelerate the transfer of wealth from govt (taxpayers/poors) to private interests (oligarchs and bankers). this happened in 2008, during Covid PPP, and it will happen again.
this would have worked in 2016, I doubt it would now. the oligarchs who put the administration in power want their pound of flesh, and they will get it regardless of whose name is in the daily headlines.
hundreds of thousands of federal workers have been fired, research and education slashed, unprecedented damage done to institutions, and civil rights violations not seen in peacetime in generations. no, I’m afraid ignoring Trump isn’t going to solve anything.
the oligarchs must be stopped. one way or another.
i concur with your assessment. aside from a miniscule number of spiteful perpetually online leftists, there is no evidence whatsoever that gaza made an impact on large numbers of voters. whether one party represented change/disruption VS status-quo/more-of-the-same is almost certainly how typical Americans framed their decision.
During the 2008 political primary season, it sought to run three television advertisements to promote its political documentary Hillary: The Movie, a film that was critical of Hillary Clinton
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
I was being a little tongue in cheek about Hillary’s role, mostly speaking to the fact that her desire to seek power endlessly and run for president against Obama in '08, is what led to the creation of the eponymous film which was the basis for Citizens United filing a suit in court. it might have happened anyway, eventually, but it’s not widely appreciated how much harm she and the DNC have done to our political culture, including losing to Trump so spectacularly in '16.
every significant Democrat has said they’re opposed to Citizens United… none of them have actually done anything to accomplish overturning it. actions speak louder than words. same with Roe v Wade, they had decades to codify it and failed.
my whole point is not about what they oppose or support, it’s that they’re ineffectual in either direction. they routinely fail at shaking up the system and manipulating the courts in favor of the 99% of Americans who they claim to support. meanwhile the GOP runs roughshod over jurisprudence and the courts and civil liberties. Dems are still better than GOP by miles and miles, but nowhere near adequate as an opposition political party.
John McCain and Hillary Clinton (yes, her) are more responsible for the bill that hand delivered gave us Citizens United to the supreme court than anyone in the DNC (which doesn’t draft legislation, they mostly just
take bribesfundraise for pro-corporate/pro-Israel lobbies and suppress progressives and independents.)they’re responsible for crafting immensely unpopular platform after platform, such as killing single payer healthcare, enabling a half senile Biden campaign, sabotaged the progressives and Bernie (twice), and gave us fucktards Schumer and Pelosi who are among the most ineffectual hated politicians in America.
please stop trolling this “vote for DNC to defeat fascism” nonsense. THEY HAD 8 YEARS TO PREPARE A TACTICAL RESPONSE TO TRUMPISM AND YET HERE WE ARE.
if one good thing can come from these senseless murders, let it be this. these services should not be allowed to operate without strict regulation.