• archomrade [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    03 months ago

    You can’t simply analyze your way out of the extremely unhealthy/unsustainable/environmentally damaging practice that is fracking by pointing to CO2 reduction policies. People aren’t objecting to fracking because of its CO2 emissions (not just, anyway), it’s a problem because it poisons aquifers and causes untold amounts of harm to subterranean and geological systems. Saying ‘but look at all the other good stuff they’re doing for CO2 reduction!’ is only compelling if CO2 was the primary concern of the practice (it isn’t).

    And anyway, you could have that conversation without constantly complaining about certain factual statements not aligning to your prejudiced electoral motivations and without coming into every conversation accusing people you disagree with of misrepresenting reality

    the current congressional climate simply will not allow a ban on fracking anyway

    lmao oh well fuck me then, guess we can’t expect any progress from our politicians

    Why do I always find you in the comments trying to nuance your way out of criticizing democratic positions.

    • mozz
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      So then I said, Herr Thälmann, how important is nuance, in analyzing a political situation? How important is compromise with people even who don’t see eye to eye with you perfectly, politically?

      And he said, ZERO. Just push for what you want. If it’s not perfect, it’s garbage; try to oppose it. Compromise is the obstacle to progress.

      And I said wait. How can I hear you? I thought you died. In Buchenwald.

      And from that point on, I heard nothing. Only silence.

      • archomrade [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        “If you have nothing good to say about my party then you must be seeking to overthrow it.”

        ‘What could go wrong with compromising with fascists’ he wonders