- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
If there is a moderate to high likelihood that the average citizen can’t afford rent and have a voice in government (ie. protesting 2 days a week, because their vote doesn’t effect policy) they live in neither a free society, nor a democracy.
One of the reasons children have been able to lead the protests is because they have a safety net.
If there is a moderate to high likelihood that the average citizen can’t afford rent and have a voice in government (ie. protesting 2 days a week, because their vote doesn’t effect policy) they live in neither a free society, nor a democracy.
In other words a free society, needs enough people to have high enough income, to have a good bit of free time and enough wealth or a strong safety so they do not have to rely on a job. Which is why homeownership is a good thing, coops and other forms of small scale ownership of capital is needed and social safety nets help the entire society. The further away those safety nets are from the government the better, as it is easy to withdraw otherwise, which is why real world “communism” was not democratic.
One of the reasons children have been able to lead the protests is because they have a safety net.
Unfortunatly that is also the reason they can not transform society, as the safety net of children is fragile. It only takes the parents to disagree with them.
It’s not that the kids won’t save us, it’s because they can’t. We are all headed for an ecological hellscape as our new reality. We need to stop squabbling about it and start preparing. We are past the poibt of avoidance
Everyone is an environmentalist until we ask them to pay for it.
Thunberg is not a child any more. The adults literally waited her out.
Capitalism’s toddlerification of it’s “successful” participants literally creates these meaningless dialogues. Our imbecilic hierarchies don’t just extend to the economical, they affect these types of social norms heavily too. There will always be a cheap way to elicit prejudice over disadvantageous and unprofitable ideas especially if the voices are from “undesirable” individuals and groups, which depending on your brainwashing target can be literally anything. We have to be able to teach already brainwashed individuals critical thinking.
We have to be able to teach already brainwashed individuals critical thinking.
Which sadly has proven impossible.
If anything, we need to figure out a way to move without trying to convince people who will never be convinced. Which is of course a really difficult problem, and riddled with risks of falling into authoritarianism.
If children stops asking for cell phones from when they turn 5 years old and youngsters stop shopping “hauls” from Chinese places like Shein then maybe they could make an impact.
Yes, that seems to be the real problem. Definitely hit the nail on the head there bud.
I don’t get this sarcasm, been on Reddit for too long?
Not buying smartphones for kids and not buying tons of cheap clothes from China will make an impact, this is something kids can do to help save us from climate change. Am I wrong?
it’s not the children’s fault when it’s the adults indoctrinating them into this consumerist mentality – the “asking for cell phones” is a learned behavior, not something they were born with …
No one has said it’s the kids fault, this interpretation is just unnecessary and hostile.
I commented that if we stop giving kids new smartphones every year and if teens stop buying tons of child slavery clothes from China they can help us to combat climate change.
