Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ManWithDominantClaw t1_iugl9h7 wrote

COP26 saw too many protests for their liking, so they're holding this one in a place where protesting is not only illegal but is enforced with serious brutality. Tells you everything you know about the leaders who are supposedly listening to the people.

116

sionnach t1_iui155e wrote

Do you really think that the day after COP26 closed they say down and thought “where will we do this next year?”

−3

Peachthumbs t1_iugna6r wrote

Well if Gretas not going, I'm not going.

61

Jazzlike_Run_5466 t1_iugui22 wrote

Im not gonna go either.

9

Glabstaxks t1_iugvf53 wrote

Me neither

6

Peachthumbs t1_iuh2g6a wrote

I'll save some plants out in the wild instead, like move a board of wood someone left by the fence near that lot which is not owned by anyone but has stuff on it cause it's sort of a messy area. Probably can catch enough sun before winter. What are you going to do instead?

1

st_j t1_iuh2gyi wrote

If you're not going I'm not going

1

rayui t1_iuhwsj1 wrote

*Rishi Sunak has left the chat*

7

mom0nga t1_iugr44x wrote

The leaders aren't going to listen to her anyway, they'll just use her as a photo-op for political points. Smart move by Greta.

42

xanas263 t1_iuh2t5q wrote

>The COP conferences, she added, "are not really meant to change the whole system", but instead encourage gradual progress.

She's not wrong and depending on who you ask that is a good thing.

As some who works within the climate domain you don't need to learn a lot about the problem to start to see that the only real solution would be to change the whole system from the ground up.

The elephant in the room is that a lot of people on the planet like the current system and the benefits it gives them. Yes it's not perfect, there are a lot of problems with it and a lot of people that are fucked over by it, but it still benefits a large proportion of people and I'm not talking about the billionaires and millionaires. A lot of people reading this comment actively benefit from the system.

While a lot of people say that they are all for sustainable living I still think the true level of reduction that would need to take place to actually live sustainably with the planet is highly unpopular by the masses. Especially when the climate crisis still feels like a very far away problem for the people and countries who need to start reducing the most.

25

FarawayFairways t1_iuhbx8f wrote

It takes some people decades to discover what Greta has concluded at the age 20 (and some never do, because they earn little living bouncing between global fountainheads talking to each other)

I'm inclined the quote Jean Claude Juncker when discussing the Eurobond crisis

> We all know what needs to be done. It's just that no one has worked out how to do it and still win an election

This goes to heart of the problem. Whereas people will routinely answer opinion polls positively when it comes to the environment, what they really mean is that they're in favour of everyone other than me making a more concerted effort

5

2012Jesusdies t1_iuhfpkx wrote

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree, it's easy to say you support radical green policies on reddit, but it's gonna be expensive af. All that externality costs that were distributed along all of humanity, plantlife and even the climate are now gonna come crashing down on you. People are already bitching about carbon taxes.

3

autotldr t1_iugi57f wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)

> London - Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg said on Sunday she will skip next month's COP27 talks in Egypt, slamming the global summit as a forum for "Greenwashing".

> Released on Thursday, Thunberg's "The Climate Book" includes about 100 contributions from various experts, including economist Thomas Piketty, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and the writer Naomi Klein.

> Again and again on Sunday, Thunberg called for more people to get involved in climate activism, saying the time had come for "Drastic changes" to the status quo.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: climate^#1 activist^#2 Thunberg^#3 book^#4 change^#5

16

pepelepew111111 t1_iuhsivp wrote

Her disappointment with forums like COP is valid given that those summits don’t often achieve much substantive progress, nor can they enforce any type of compliance.

However I would argue that having some form of dialogue and some incremental progress is better than none at all, therefore giving these summits a degree of value which should not be dismissed.

There are massive gaps in perception and action when it comes to climate change and what to do about it. Like it or not, the solution will have to be political to some degree.

2

v052020 t1_iuh87x8 wrote

Slamming...

1

Seriksy t1_iuhmsau wrote

What's even the point of climate talks? It's just that, talks

1

sillypicture t1_iuja4vc wrote

Next she's going to bring a widowmaker to the G7.

0

billybishop4242 t1_iujbje9 wrote

So go to it and say your piece.

I get legitimizing it is bad in a way but is “operating contentedly outside the system” a better option?

If I had her voice i would use every platform as an opportunity.

0

eva-geo t1_iuh8v0e wrote

Here she goes again all talk no boots on the ground. If she wants to keep talking about climate I’d like to see her actually do something about it just talking is not helping those of us in the thick of things.

Note: It’s worse than you can imagine.

−1

Guaranteed-Return t1_iuhmma7 wrote

If she's not using it, can I use Greta's propaganda yacht?

−3

Mr_Blu_Sq t1_iuh34rt wrote

Greenpeace fatburg still a thing is she ??

Odd.

−16

act20200615 t1_iugup20 wrote

As opposed to skipping skool?

−19

rush_me_pls t1_iuh0c06 wrote

Oh nooo. Anyway… Stay in school. Stop playing activist. The climate is fcked anyway, feedback loop and stuff.

−19

[deleted] t1_iugf5vw wrote

[deleted]

−31

KeyWestTime t1_iuggghx wrote

>Why is anyone on the planet giving ANY attention to that girl.

Because she relentlessly advocates for the survival of our planet and our species.

20

yallmad4 t1_iugg4i4 wrote

So her autism is disqualifying for a valid opinion but yours isn't?

19

1st3inAZ t1_iugg4kt wrote

Asperger’s is her strength. You’d use it as insult and punchline.

For shame.

Criticize her on facts or merits. Don’t for who she is, what differences she has or how she messages. The facts are that she’s correct about the problem and shines a bright light upon it to help maintain focus and attention.

And, just perhaps, the most pressing problem of our time warrants that.

>Why is anyone on the planet giving ANY attention to that girl. Did people just forget that Greta Thunberg has Asperger's syndrome..??

>Come on now, her her intense and unrelenting focus and rants about stolen dreams and youth are part of her OCD as a person with Asperger's syndrome.

9

hatkiss t1_iughshn wrote

Whats with the ablest language? She is an activist. Nothing about this has anything to do with her having aspbergers.

7

[deleted] t1_iugdh5j wrote

[deleted]

−35

nutmeggerking t1_iugy1ue wrote

Lol, I love how you post weak insults and your profile basically says "if you call me out on my shit, I will whine and block you waaah."

7

ParticularReview4129 t1_iugy5fy wrote

Interesting 🤔

−11

nutmeggerking t1_iugy9iz wrote

:) maybe don't be condescending and people won't come back at you. The fact that it's listed on your profile means this happens to you a lot. So maybe, just maybe, also consider the possibility that sometimes it's a direct result of how you conduct yourself.

8

ParticularReview4129 t1_iugz7ia wrote

I have had times when I have said things as simple as I prefer Apple Pie and gotten shit for it. Me being unimpressed with Greta is not reason to get down votes. If I said oil spills aren't a big deal then down vote to hell. It is ok to disagree with someone. It is not okay to attack a person.

−2

nutmeggerking t1_iuh50rw wrote

> It is ok to disagree with someone. It is not okay to attack a person.

Yeah, but you didn't actually provide anything remotely constructive. The fact that you seem to think you did is worrying. Your comment wasn't even a proper critique of Greta, it was just lazy and immature. Pretending that you were merely saying that you are "unimpressed with Greta" is just nonsense.

3

ReliableChicken t1_iugtjdx wrote

Her delusional grandiose is staggering.

Edit - Her delusions of grandeur is staggering

Edit due to a user having issues that my opinion have a grammatical error

−37

APsWhoopinRoom t1_iugu1ur wrote

Hey genius, the term you're looking for is "delusions of grandeur." If you're going to try using big words to insult someone, maybe you should try using the right words.

13

[deleted] t1_iugublz wrote

[removed]

−20

APsWhoopinRoom t1_iuguzv1 wrote

Take careful notice of how "delusions of grandeur" is one of the very first things mentioned in the article. Then, take careful notice of how "delusional grandiose" (what you originally said above) is not mentioned.

10

ReliableChicken t1_iugv9sz wrote

Is this your thing? Seeing someone post and try to be a bully and impose your perceived intelligence through Reddit? Are you having a bad day? Do you want to chat? Seriously mental health is at crisis point world wide and trolling is a symptom of a very lonely person. Can help to talk,

−16

APsWhoopinRoom t1_iugw1rv wrote

LMAO that's pretty hypocritical considering your original comment picking on an acclaimed teenage environmental activist. Textbook projection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection?wprov=sfla1

11

ReliableChicken t1_iugx8ct wrote

what do you think you’re doing by attacking my comment and immediately try to be sarcastic and condescending? Ever done any self reflection? Have you always been so “triggered”? Your comments in reply to others are so negative and attacking. And your using “acclaimed” a little freely. She would be more infamous. Maybe if you tried yoga or meditation? Honestly look at your comments and try to see them from another’s point of view. You seem so sad. Have you got someone to talk to?

−4

APsWhoopinRoom t1_iugxlcd wrote

*you're

Sorry, you kept making that mistake repeatedly, and it was starting to bother me. Your = possessive. You're = you are.

Again, you're the one picking on a kid that has done more to help climate activism than you or I ever will. I'm just calling you out for acting like a dickhead. How many Nobel Peace Awards have you been nominated for? She absolutely is acclaimed, and frankly I find it disturbing that you inexplicably despise her so much.

9

ReliableChicken t1_iugyw2t wrote

it’s a simple thing to do to see how easy a person is to trigger. You really think she has done anything for climate change? She received the “ oh how nice, go away now” award.

https://time.com/5685786/greta-thunberg-alternative-nobel-prize-climate-change/

We use “alternative” to make the ones who try hard but really are doing nothing feel good about themselves. And people who want to feel they are doing something without actually doing anything feel validated. Bit like religion and prays. . . . 🎣

I find it disturbing you continue to think you know anything about me.

I listen to actual environmental experts and people who have applied their lives to scientific endeavors rather than some child being used as a proxy mouth piece. We don’t need her to have a tantrum on a stage to know the planet is ruined. So your ( lol ) allowed to have an opinion but because you don’t like mine, I’m not allowed to have one and gives you the entitlement to be a dickhead? See any issue there?

Good luck with your life, hope you find some happiness, honestly think you should look into some help.

−3

Zogfrog t1_iuh2a18 wrote

Actual environmental experts are very supportive of Greta, even more so now that she has become more knowledgeable about nuclear energy.

She’s not perfect, none of us are, but she’s not full of her herself like you suggest and she’s done more good than you ever will.

You are using incels talking points ("tantrum", seriously ?), maybe examine your own delusions.

And yes, you were using that phrase incorrectly.

4