Yes and no. How popular do you think ending oil extraction is in those areas? Whatever the percent, that’s also a level of consent.

Some evil shit either way. Probably a practice of killing the adults and abducting the children to be raised in a controlled setting.

Are you joking?

Big crunching machine.

If this is the new Olympics Games, what are the games?

Anything helps.

“Cutting methane is the single most important strategy to slow near-term warming,” says Durwood Zaelke, the president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, and a longtime advocate of action on methane. “In fact, it’s the only strategy that has a chance of working. Cutting carbon dioxide is a marathon, but methane is a sprint.”

Cutting methane emissions is much more in the realm of cutting the more optional activity, so it’s a great low hanging fruit. This also applies to the meat industry.

The carbon footprint, like the ecological footprint, is an average proxy for wealth. Wealth is political.

How are we to win the hearts and minds of these people by saying we intend to take their solid livelihoods?

Yes, that is a good question. Here’s another:

How are we to win the hearts and minds of these people by lying about their responsibility in the predicament? “Oh, it’s not you, it’s just this small group of billionaires which you admire want to replace!”

You don’t work with the people who want in on the suicidal game. The optimists need to be brought into reality, that’s something to work on. But for the psychos, you work around them, you around against them, not with them.

It’s about the environmentalists arguments. If you don’t want to engage in those, don’t.

In general, it’s good to know your enemy.

How could it not be political?

It’s a shame that I can’t downvote you across this federated connection.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

True, but I opened the link directly: https://slrpnk.net/post/30007963 shouldn’t that work on its own?

Can’t say that the next dark age was accidental.

link is broken :(

“Environment for me, but not for thee.”

In a sense, it’s an older mentality related to taking over territory. The “eco” is tied to “cleansing” the territory for the added reason of having some park or sustainable looking agriculture or animal farming [for the master race]. A lot of the focus is on population and how great it would be if there were only a few (but “superior”) humans around. Not them, of course, it’s the others who “need to go”. This links effortlessly to the Nazis’ Lebensraum idea.

Good. The Sierra Club needed to dump its ecofash faction. I’m not going to read NYT, they’ve been complicit in horrible shit for a century, I have zero respect for them.

Keep learning, including learning how to write well.

Your point was carnist apologetics.

You’re providing no references, no context, no phrasing. Whoever gave you an upvote must’ve been high on something.