• @RapidcreekOP
      link
      English
      7
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If the argument is that the long-term trends of humanity are such that we have a significantly higher chance of self-ceasing (an argument that I’d agree with given climate change), then that needs to be stated, especially since the clock has generally been seen as how close we are to imminent destruction.

      The question, then, is how to best represent the fact that we’re already knee deep in a slow moving global catastrophe, as opposed to on the brink of an imminent one?

        • @RapidcreekOP
          link
          English
          210 months ago

          The question remains. The clock is supposed to be about impending doom. Slow moving disasters can include many things and I used climate change as an example. But there are many others. Disease, blight and even an asteroid if it’s big enough.

          • DessertStorms
            link
            fedilink
            310 months ago

            The issue really is that these people don’t like the reminder because they don’t want to act because they are still comfortable and they know any meaningful action “threatens” their way of life (because they can only think within the box capitalism created for them, making them fear anything outside of it).

            They’ll tell you they do act until they’re blue in the face, but it will come down to things like driving an EV and using a reusable cup at Starbucks. Because it’s about making themselves feel better, not fighting the actual problem - same as framing the clock as fearmongering instead of the desperate call to action it has become…