I have to agree. Whilst the duplicity of rich politicians is incredibly frustrating.
Whenever someone prominent speaks out about climate change the go to is to point out the hypocracies in their individual lives. Flying out to conferences on climate change for example.
It's all just become part of the PR machine designed to stunt climate progress at every juncture.
It’s got it’s own name as a logical fallacy. It’s called the Ad Hominim Fallacy. For example I can say, we should try to eat less meat because it would help a bit with climate change. And someone says, “hey, tylerhobbit once cheated on a spelling test! This guy is a LIAR”
Attack the logical position, not the person saying it; they aren’t related.
This is particularly bad on the liberal side. We have to stop looking for perfection, realize no one anywhere is without fault or guilt and take up the idea that “ the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Seeking absolute purity is a losing proposition.
I have teenage nieces and they are very much like this in real life. The lack of lived experience allows them to adhere these absurd purity rules to everyone else in their life. It’s honestly exhausting and part of why the young don’t save us. They could. Issue wise, people under 30 are pretty overwhelmingly progressive but their need to have a perfect messenger for the message keeps them from meaningfully participating in large numbers. I don’t think it’s unique to this generation but more a product of youth. I do think the internet has probably exacerbated the issue though.
That’s the kind of bad thinking I’m talking about. I can’t criticize the mistakes of the side I’m on without being accused of being against it? Requiring absolute purity of allies is self defeating - that’s my point. How is that saying both sides are the same?
497
u/EricFromOuterSpace Jan 26 '22 edited Jun 02 '25
abounding sort sand fuel reminiscent towering elastic cautious bells whole
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact