We’re trapped on a burning planet with superstitious dictators committing holocausts in broad daylight and there are forum mods/admins who find it within themselves to stop you from advocating online to ixnay a few fascists or billionaires
Fuck retards who vote for fascist lunatics.
Okay but why the r-slur
Eh, at this point can we just agree that word doesn’t apply to people with actual disabilities? It hasn’t been used as such for decades. Maybe we just agree to only use it to refer to morons, the same way “moron” was once a medical term.
Didn’t the words moron and imbecile follow along a similar line of etymological evolution that the r-word went through? Yet imbecile and moron are considered acceptable offensive words to use. To be honest it’s why I don’t really care that much about the r-word itself.
Soooo many other words, just pick a better one.
Seriously why are you acting like using words is so frigging hard.
There’s so much worse shit going on in the world as is the entire point of the discussion and this is the hill your choosing to die on here? Mere inconvenience of learning to just use words?
There are many hills to die on, but I have standards and those standards are important. Just pick a better word next time and move on, it’s not that difficult.
How about you just ignore it and move on, instead of asking everyone to pander to your standards? Not to be rude, but no one on the internet gives a shit about your standards, and no one is going to try to comply with them. Use the downvote button if you don’t like the word
But why? Some people are still hurt by it’s usage, we have other words.
Are people actually hurt by its usage or is it another case of “protecting” people who don’t really mind?
I think about 5% of the time it’s someone who’s actually affected, and 95% of the time it’s performative moralising. Of course there’s no way of telling which time is which…
I mean I know people hurt by it personally so I don’t use it, to each their own I guess. Surprised that’s a hot take though
speaking about hot takes…. So Why are you still going on about the inconvenience of just changing words? Just learn new words and be done with it. Can’t be that hard. Kids can learn new words every day. I believe in you.
I heard Cartman say it’s ok to use it now and he is my moral compass.
This is something I’ve been wondering about.
The r-slur is one of the few words that actually bothers fascists.
If you call them a “fascist” they don’t care. If you call them a “nazi”, they don’t care. If you call them a “traitor”, some of them care a little bit. These are not insults that get under their skin.
But if you call them a “retrd" or a "fggot”, it can really rustle their jimmies. In their minds, these are actual insults.
So if using the slur hurts the fascists more than it hurts the marginalized group, would that usage be justified? Wield the word as a weapon against the fascists, in a way?
I’m not sure, leaning probably not. But if I see ICE in the street I would like something to yell at them that actually bothers them. Maybe “Trump is a kiddie diddler” will work for a little while.
Reddit is a dumping ground of hate generated by AI eating fuel to wreck the planet further
Maybe this is just my media bubble, and I’m not saying I haven’t seen any articles about it, but I feel like remarkably little attention overall is being given to how many fucking people are dying in these heat disasters. Not just this one, but over and over.
It is just a common thing that it doesn’t make interesting news. Same for how many traffic deaths there are.
In that same vein, frearms are now the leading, primary cause of death for children and teens, in the US.
Boomers largely do not believe this, I’ve argued with several even here on lemmy about this, provided data, studies, they never admit they’re wrong.
Absolute explosion of mass shooting events, victims are far more likely to be Gen Z or Gen A.
Again, firearms have killed more children in the US than car crashes, cancer, etc, for several years in a row now.
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/guns-remain-leading-cause-of-death-for-children-and-teens
Just checked this, you’re right. It’s a useful clarification that what the school teaches nowadays is also right but a different methodology. Schools often teach that accidents cause the most deaths, then health, then homicide, then suicide, and that car crashes are the most common kind of accidents. This is true.
On the other hand, if you group by both mechanism and intent (still among ages 15–19, though 10–14 is similar but at a smaller scale), you have unintentional car crashes in the lead, ahead of firearm homicide by about four hundred. Combine this with undetermined and accidental firearm deaths, and the lead shrinks to about three hundred. Meanwhile, there are over a thousand cases of suicide by firearms, and (nearly?) no logged cases of homicide by car.
Fact right here. I used to work as a paramedic in a city with a couple of large bridges. So many people suicided off those bridges that it never got reported. It was too common and not shocking enough.
You say that, but infuriatingly I’m always amazed by how much above the fold top national news story reporting gets allocated to traffic deaths.
“4 year old girl dies in crash on the M1”
Okay, that’s terrible, but is it really a good use of the nation’s time to read about how lovely this child was and how tragic the crash was? Are there not maybe more informative and educational and useful news stories you could be pushing to the top of the news, rather than this?
You’d think it was some backwater news broadcaster but no, this is from the likes of the BBC. Wild.
No its not just you.
Climate coverage drastically diminished roughly during Covid, never came back, despite us blowing through the 1.5C limit 2 years ago now, insurance companies in the US more or less abandoning roughly the southern third of the US due to their own climate models, despite the AMOC destabilizing, despite us recently realizing the SMOC has actually been destabalized for a decade and is actively deteriorating.
Yes, there is clearly an active push to just ignore it, it’s been driving me insane.
Our media has a lot to answer for
Yes, but they’re poor and brown and far away, so who cares, right?
Bordeaux today: 43°C feel like: 49°C
eventually these temperatures left uncontrolled would reach Estonia.
As an American, I thought “49° isn’t that bad… Wait WTF THAT’S IN CELSIUS?!?”
Never seen temps that high before. Holy shit.
Wtf, in France? This is insane. I live in Australia where days above 40 are expected, but in FRANCE?
“We’ve survived record-breaking high temperatures before, we’ll survive them again”
(based on an actual quote from GB News, a Fox News wannabe)
if you can read this, that means u are still alive, so you will survive the next one too, surely
Breaking news : Surviving record-breaking high temperatures once makes you immortal !
30p once claimed that coal is a renewable fuel source because it comes from trees.
The carboniferous period would be rolling in its grave if we hadn’t dug it up.
Sounds like someone doesn’t understand the concept of breaking records.
Or maybe they’re the kind that looks at records as numbers to be beaten
Sounds like you’re just salty my cancer is at an all-time high and yours isn’t.
“ignore it until you can’t anymore”
Lol. A few years ago we watched conservatives ignore COVID until they were literally dead.
So they ignored it until they couldn’t anymore.
No, brother. The dead ignore everything. Not even the death of our sun will wake them.
Ignoring something requires intent.
Does a mountain ignoring a man mean that the mountain has the capacity to take notice?
Ignorance is simply entropy by another name. Information is energy, and ignorance is the absence.
Definition of ignore: refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally.
A mountain doesn’t ignore anything because it doesn’t have the capacity to be aware of anything to then choose to ignore it.
How do you know? Have you asked the mountain?
deleted by creator
Not that I know of.
Or it at least requires awareness
The harrowing thing for me about “Don’t Look Up”, was that you couldn’t tell if it was about climate change, or Covid, or basically any other far-right political denialism.
I assumed it was covid at first, but then I realised how long it takes to make a movie and it came out too soon… It was just that accurate.
Funny how a lot of criticism was about how it was “too on the nose”, but really, it still seems to have gone over people’s heads
The ending is what really got me.
They all just sat down and kept trying to live life the way they always had, like going back and making everything the way it was just for a little while was all they could do in the face of obliteration.
I don’t know about anyone else, but the way that scene is drawn out, as the viewer, I was just expecting some deus ex machina shit to happen, like a volcano would divert the shockwave, or they would survive under the rubble, or the whole thing was a fever dream… And they all just get obliterated by the disaster they all knew was coming and no longer preventable. It’s how I feel living in a house with AC, and having two cars in the driveway. I’m contributing to the climate crisis, but as an individual, I have zero impact in what is happening. The people with the power to cut back and actually make an impact on the climate won’t, because they only have that power though greed above everything else.
Anyway, sorry if you’re depressed after reading it. When we hit +1.5C, all the cool people can come over to my house for a nice dinner before the food supply collapses and the famine sets in.
Yea, it’s the ending line
“We had it good”
that really got me. The resignation that there’s just things out of your control even if you go down fighting.
If that’s your attitude, why are you waiting until later to open your home, share meals, or lend your car to people?
Theft, money, insurance.
I wanna change the world, but I still have to live in it first.
If we aren’t changing it, we aren’t living in it.
I don’t get that criticism. Being on the nose and over the top is a stylistic choice that can be really wonderful. I mean look at Bong Joon-Ho’s movies. They are all extremely on the nose. It seems like critics just have a smug preference for subtlety and ambiguity
Being on the nose and over the top is a stylistic choice that can be really wonderful
Right, but it can also be obnoxious to beat over the head with the same concept over and over. ]
It seems like critics just have a smug preference for subtlety and ambiguity
I don’t know why you ascribe smugness to it, someone that watches movies for a living is obviously gonna prefer films that don’t waste time telling the audience something more than necessary.
Since the audience seems to miss the same point over and over again, it might be less than necessary
Or they might be the wrong audience, a little of column A and B. Of course the arts are about communication, which requires effort on both parties, so each side bears some of the blame. But “we need to create something so obvious that nobody will miss it” just ends up producing people who are more oblivious. The computer simplification trends of the 2000s and 2010s resulted in a generation that knows even less about technology.
More horror than dark comedy, hard to laugh after watching it. Such utter helplessness after all other attempts to stop extinction from happening fail.
Makes you wish you first have to raise a revolution – deal with those elites awash in absolute power and then get rid of them from ever ruling – before taking on the task of combating the actual horror about to happen. But right now and what is infuriating is that those bastards in power are trying to squelch the voices rising up to pull them down.
I was sure that would decimate their voter base, between those who died and those who were left to see the fall out.
Let’s not forget they were all, and still are, shitting their organs out on horse dewormer
“Global warming” was always a weak formulation of the problem, and “climate change” is even weaker. I prefer “Anthropogenic runaway global heating” which has the handy acronym ARGH.
In german the term “climate catastrophe” (Klimakatastrophe) is used more and more often.
I like it when people use ecocide. Like ecological murder, destruction.
Words are important!
Good word, but needs more connotation of “suicide” as well.
Nah but we’re getting rid of the NASA satellites that monitor this so we won’t see climate change anymore
“If we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any,” Trump asserted.
He’s so smart
deleted by creator
Krakatoa dropped the global temperature by a degree for several years. All we need is multiple Krakatoa scale eruptions to solve this problem forever!
/S
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injection
Either we will choose these temporary measures to buy more time or billions will die.
It is a matter of time until we try it.
I would suggest mining asteroids, using the material to craft thin foil mirrors with 3 axis gyroscopes then positioning them at L1 Lagrange in order to selectively reduce incoming solar radiation to a safe, custom level, but obviously our ruling psychopaths will simply use it to block light to countries that don’t pay up, and to focus it on countries to burn away undesirables.
And of course then we’ll all have to pay a sunlight bill.
We’re going to have nuclear fusion before we have asteroid mining. And I’m not saying that fusion is anywhere close.
Sunlight+, a new subscription service from NBCUniversalComcastDisneyFederalGovernment
Or we could put a wide brim hat on the earth
“We tried it and it worked so we can just keep doing it forever, problem solved!”
I think that sort of thing has been suggested
It has, it’s basically the field of geoengineering
Meanwhile, OPEC and one of the most dangerous countries in the world: “Drill, baby, drill! Burn, baby, burn!”
trump is bought by the fossil fuel industry. it doesn’t make sense for the US to not import solar panels. cheap energy drives manufacturing, and solar is cheap.
It’s simple: there aren’t any “big solar” companies that could pay trump or most politicians more than big oil (chevron, bp, shell, exxon) companies do.
Work from home, buy less stuff, eat less meat, and most importantly throw all billionaires feet first into a wood chipper.
The problem is real. the past few years it’s been raining as much as snowing during polar night in northern Norway.
There was the theory I read last year about billionaires not giving a shit that the world is getting worse because they were building bunkers and yachts and hoarding resources.
Knowing what I know about religious folks who also actively push for the end of the world to fight with angels or some shit, it checks out.
1 billion people doing a major life change would move the needle in fixing the world. But you can also get the same results with a few billionaires.
Sure but walking home is gonna do jack shit, we gotta focus on the wood chipper part
Work from home. You know, naked from the waist down during zoom meetings, etc.
50.5 C is 123 F
41.8 C is 107 FYou’re making it worse now the numbers are bigger. Converted into Kelvin and then we’ll be okay.
bigger numbers scarier
convert it into kelvin to be more okay
>.<
Something’s funky here.
Welp. Good thing I’m gonna die.
That’s what the politicians think too.
I’m surprised there has been so little ecoterrorism in response to climate change.
I was expecting some kind of analog to the terrorist groups of the 70s in Europe for sure. But all the violence is coming from the other side.
Have you read The Ministry for the Future? Pretty much that plot line. People just get fed up and take it into their own hands. I liked it.
Even though I understood what you meant and think you mean well, I have to say that I hate this word. Terrorism refer to “mass killing innocent civilians” to terrorise everyone. Those referred to by that word are not killing anyone, they are merely destroying inanimate objects or blocking roads… Nobody is terrorised by them, nobody fear for their life after their actions. We should call them “ecoactivists”, or something like that.
People are disenfrenchised. Why should they care more about the weather than the medical system, corruption, wild animals or all the other problems. People know, they are just trained to not get involved.
Showing the problem trains them to ignore it more. What they need is confidence in their own abilities.
Why should they care more about the weather
Because this weather directly leads to forest fires, floods and storms that can seriously ruin their life.
What life. Speaking for the US, our country is being dismantled by Nazis and half the country seems blissfully unaware.
Are you implying everyone is dead? Because that isn’t the case.
Even if it sucks, that doesn’t mean you have to make it suck even more. That is counter productive.
Stop your doomerism and actually DO something. Life is far from being over. Even if it it takes loading everything in a vehicle and moving away. The US is not the center of the Earth.
OK bud 👍
The US: “haha the French surrender a lot”
Reality: The French actually protest shit and US citizens will roll over and die if you tell them cheeseburger prices might go up a dollar if they resist.
I’m in Canada and we’re really not much better in many ways, but we can always look to the US for comfort knowing we’re not that bad.
French surrender jokes are a British thing, not American.
Sure, and apart from maybe bringing a temporary headline from some dramatic act of eco-terrorism, what’s the average person’s options at their disposal?
Granted, you’re posting from a European account (hi from the US where this issue is even worse), but at the civilian level with people who do not have the capital or political influence to interrupt the engine of society, why risk anything by trying? For such marginal effect?
Sowing desperation is one of the strategies of the fossil lobby.
If people organize, they have tremendous power. Going to protests, making a local group to prevent ecocidal developments. Scrutinizing the deals of local government with companies known to are particularly destructive, organizing targeted consumer boycotts, making it a key issue in who you vote for or don’t vote for.
The lobbies are scared of people breaking the apathy, so they spend enormous amounts of money on maintaining it. But if it breaks, it breaks hard and you could see changes in a year that seemed impossible in a lifetime before.
You could collect rain water to mitigate the impact of drought. Pretty much anyone should be able to manage that.
Listen to the experts, they have plenty of things the average person can do that don’t require you to commit terrorism.
those experts say that the individual efforts to curb global warming is insignificant compared to other methods. its a waste of time akin to telling everyone to recycle, only for the dump to mix it in with all the other trash.
its theater to make people think that they are doing their part so they don’t band together and demand action. just like the ‘good’ protesting we do in the states is designed in a way to give people the illusion of making a difference all wile being easily controllable, and easily dismissed. when considered that its actually used as a method of control, preaching for individual efforts to curb global warming is worse then doing nothing because you stand in the way of the conversation that must be taken to actually solve the problem.
