*has totally been looked at by a dermatologist

Someone discovered the dialectic of individual and society

I was gonna add “these days” but didn’t

I get the epic of marking climate change as a general human issue by doing stonehenge. Doing, let’s say, the wall street bulls statue or smth in London marking climate change as a capital issue would have been smarter thou

Oh god please no, please don’t escalate this war by adding the killer kind of weapons to it

Looks more like a few hours of cramping body and soul followed by 3 days of emotional hangover

Yeah maybe be should start wearing a diving mask for a few hours once a month as a nose appreciation ritual

Emtpynoseness mindfulness

I understand and totally support that in general. I’m gonna try to explain my point of view.

In this case we don’t exactly look at policy-making. Between stating that a majority supports governmental action to ban one use plastics and actual policy is a process.

This process will “forge” the outcome. In it, several conflicting interests will meet/clash and according to the power relations between them, they will be able to enforce their respective will.

Since the power relations are, let’s say, fucked up, we are constantly seeing how profit of few overrule need of many and overall rational solutions.

Thats why the criterion “clearness” seems out of place for me at this point. Certanly, before it comes to the actual policy-making, things like the washabillity of surgical equipment will be processed. You will certanly not end up with a dirty scalpel in your body.

That’s why the scepticism of your initial comment seemed odd to me.

Don’t know if this should be seen as a given standard, or if we (“average lemmy users”) should disclaim it more often, but I don’t mean to be offensive (even though this format of short message discourse provoces a certain sass). I mean to have meaningful conversation about each others POV’s. That’s somewhat the point of lemmy, imo.

The magic about collective action is that the everyday-normal-coorperation of humans comes up with solutions for everyone. The pointer to individual decision-making in lack of collective action thus doesn’t work as a measure of how serious people are.

Also seen in episodes like

“Oh, you are wearing shoes made under unfair conditions?!”

And

“Oh there is fossil fuel in your energy consumption?”

Or

“Oh if you like democracy so much, why do you exist in a not-so-democratic-country?”

Regarding how rushed international policy-making for the environment and against profitability is not at all a problem has never been and won’t be anytime soone, that “scepticism” seems to be the product of “looking for superiority” here, imho

1. Tiniest fraction of single use plastic
2. Could be recycled or reused/resterilized
3. What flavour of skepticism are you trying to perform rn?

It is not. If it was consensual it might be. If it’s real it’s not.

Surpressing your empathy in face of dire news is your right. We all have to in order to psychologically survive these times.

I think you shouldn’t act out that surpression as a funny joke in public. This adds to the brutalization of the public, wich we can’t really afford in these times, if we want them to become more human, more bearable

Paywall at the real article… Why would they?

And they live in a filmstudio white house in one continious sitcom and voting is replaced by how many stars you give each episode. A commission of reaction-video-youtubers intetpret the episode to forge the ratings into political policy making

Yeah and you would not have said “I’m anti south-africa”, but add “apartheid”, for good reasons and as you just did

No. You identify a state with its govenment and both with the people. Any progressive vision of history would be off the table if you were right.

I understand the impetus in face of a horrible situation, but it doesn’t help.

Imagine talking to progressives on either side. That kind of simplification only makes sense from a total outside view.

Hope lies in understanding societies inner conflicts. Change for the better just as well

Edit: the amount of f’s and o’s for a given o or t respectively, is difficult for me

Putting both, “anti-israel” and “pro-palestine” in the headline is probably an attempt to avoid undercomplex thinking. Great discourse strategy, very helpful

Okay on second thought I wanna take back that warriors comment, that was too bitchy. Guess I’m also not uneffected by how toxic the whole discourse on Israel (also in or between lefty communities) is.

Like, everyone seems to feel they’d have to be either “pro israel” or “pro palestine”, wich imo 1. Is freaking dangerous for germans specifically 2. Doesn’t recognize the complexity (in the sense of one can’t just identify the totality of Israel with its right wing government as ome can’t just identify palestine with hamas.) 3. It tends to overlook the perspective of both israelian and palestinian lefties

No, see response in other comment

Ok wow. First, thanks to everyone who have their estimates. Appreciated. And for everyone else and the warriors of downvoting: No I was not trolling abd not it’s not THAT unilkely for it to be lefties (yes okay anarchists and tankies I mostly said as exmples so you know what I’m trying to ask)

If you are interested: there is a german lefty flavor called Antideutsche (anti-german). They are Zionists, antifas, anticapitalist, have a thing for violence (stylizing “bomber harris” for example), say weird thing like “protecting ur environment is like protecting your ‘home country’ like nazis would” and sometimes think of whoever basically as if they were nazis.

I’m not making this up, lefties go weird ways sometimes.

Edit readibility