Uplifting News

That's because billionaires like Robert Murdock own all our media and they use their power to push disinformation to undermine class solidarity and democracy.

If we want to save the world then we have to get rid of the billionaires asap as they are the greatest threat to democracy.

A fair concern. It's no peer reviewed research article that's for sure, but it was somewhat news to me and may be to others who likewise did not know and/or needed to hear it.

"News" here meaning from an authoritative source (though I did not confirm that this person even so much as exists, much less is actually a climate scientist) and bringing information that is not trivially already known to the audience.

A lot of the "news" focuses on the tipping point (to be able to reverse the effects of climate change), thus leaving a gap between that vs. what we are now desiring more to know: just how fucked are we all?

But if it needs to be removed, that's okay with me - I don't want to mess up the community's implementation of the rules.

"oh good then we don't have to do anything right now"

I don't think healthy skepticism is forbidden here, so feel free to write your rebuttal.

Some humans are more adaptive than others. The ones that have been sitting around with their heads in the sand aren't going to survive.

I don't know if it's really selfish more people are a part of a system that is bigger than them that forces them into situations that have a negative impact on CO2 levels

Working a job that has low pay which probably force people to housing that is further from their work place, in America most cities don't have a great public transportation infrastructure nor do they have alternative commuting options like protected bike lanes. This forces people to have to drive more.

The Return to Office bullshit has forced more cars on the road that were not there 4 years ago which is impacting CO2 levels

These are just 2 of many different things that the system has created that have put people in situations that make slowing CO2 levels more difficult.

This Tweet isn't blaming you.

To me, this argument sounds like someone trying to justify their own littering because corporations don't dispose of their waste properly.

This is a well established climate-change-laggard argument. It's the whataboutism logical fallacy.

Why should I take action, at great personal cost, when someone else is not taking action and will in fact benefit from my burden?

The Australian (and other) governments hide behind this same excuse. "Australia is just a small country, why should we take action when our CO2 production is just a small portion of that of other countries like China?".

I mean it's a good point, billionaires are worthy of great criticism, and Australia should be putting pressure on other countries, but at the same time we as individuals really do need to be taking action.

I do agree that polluting corporations use this narrative and I also find it infuriating. It's particularly palpable with plastic producers, as in plastic pollution is not their fault, but the fault of consumers failing to recycle. It's not the fault of consumers, it's the fault of regulators, who are elected by voters who are also consumers.

In summary, the whole thing is fucked and everyone sucks, but you still have to tidy up your own shit.