Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Michael Haardt's avatar

I feel tempted to agree, but something is not right. Where's the issue with this communication?

Factual level: Previous generations did not care. True, they did not.

Self-disclose: She is worried. And she is conscious of the issue. And would do something, if only she wasn't such a universal victim.

Relationship: She is superior to others, because at least she knows and worries.

Appeal: People should care and do something.

So, what is tempting to agree with you? Obviously the relationship and appeal layer. Nobody likes to be looked down to and commanded.

Yet, our generation and previous ones knew and did not care, and neither does this one. That _is_ worrying. So, if only we all acted local, would that change something globally?

The problem is the question. Our behavior is driven by our culture in many ways. Even if some dropped the ties, the majority never will. It is not a matter of weakness, but of social beings. That is why all cultures follow a trend, no matter how bad, until they hit a road block, an external event forcing them to change, all at once. All cultures did or do believe they were and are the best and last culture, even though since the birth of humanity all but the current ones were wrong about that.

Taking the desert home was a good choice. There is no point in escalation.

Expand full comment
Vinz Ulive's avatar

So where do you see this going? Let me know if you see other options:

1) Climate Change is a hoax and nothing happens. Business as usual.

2) We escape climate apocalypse by building a huge anti-climate or whatever, machine.

3) We build social and political consensus and are able to reduce emissions and avoid the worst outcome.

4) We do nothing or very little, and the Human Species is almost wiped out entirely, knocking us back to some middle-age dystopia.

Am I missing something?

Cheers

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts