My problem.with Greta Thunberg.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
My problem is that implicitly we're supposed to take children such as her and the Parkland students seriously in politics... but we're not allowed to criticize them because they're just kids. It seems more like she's being used as a propaganda tool and shield from criticism.

Bingo. And some of the same people who get upset over people criticizing the ignorant little brat are the same people who are perfectly fine with people attacking the mini-AOC girl simply because she pushes a different political view than theirs.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
She's passionate about environmentalism and has been given the opportunity to share her concerns about the future of the planet, as well as her grievances with both government and corporate lax environmental regulations, on the world stage. That's pretty f*cking admirable, especially for someone as young as she.

I'm more annoyed by childish adults who think their deity of choice will bless them with whatever they need, believe or act like natural resources are unlimited, don't give a f*ck about what they pass on to younger and future generations, and make time out of their mundane lives to mock a child for trying to make a positive impact on the world.

And there it is. There’s a reason a child was used, and said reason is simple. Anyone who criticizes her, are called man child and ostracized.

How dare you a full grown adult criticize a child that is passionate about the future of the world.

No, dude. There seems to be an embarrassingly large number of adults who are comfortable and content with insulting her intelligence, her appearance, her motivations, and even her mental health because they disagree with something she said or her stance on climate change in general. Many don't even bother to say why they disagree with her. It's enough for them to call her an annoying little b*tch or an autistic c*nt than to actually challenge what she is proposing.

That's not criticizing a child's ideas, that's just straight up venom. If they said the shit they were talking about her in person or online to her face, it would qualify as harrassment, if not child abuse.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Or, they are invested in finding a solution and are using the amount of attention they're receiving in the moment to push for change. That doesn't mean they're right about everything, but the most important parts of their messages either cite research data from experts, or point to successful models.

The typical dismissals are pathetic.

For example:

Parkland survivors: "[We should ban these types of weapons. They're prohibited from civilian use in Australia and these other countries, and they have very few, if any, mass shootings.]"

Murican A: "No! 2nd Amendment! Some bullshit about protection against criminals and a tyrannical government!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but that'll never work here. Our cultures are far too different, so we shouldn't try it at all."

Murican C: "I like guns! Guns are cool! I like guns and I feel really cool when I have a gun!"

Murican D: "Even if you take away guns, people will just find other shit to kill each other with. By the way, wasn't there a knife attack a couple of months ago?"

................

Greta Thunberg: "[My generation and future generations are f*cked unless we heed the warnings from the scientific community and make major changes to our way of living and our means of production.]"

Murican A: "She's a puppet of the left! She's spreading propaganda and fear-mongering!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but I'll be dead by then, so I don't care."

Murican C: " I like meat! Meat is good! I like meat and I feel really good when I eat meat!"

Murican D: "That sounds inconvenient, so I'd rather not. By the way, where are her parents? Shouldn't she be in school?"

Maybe if they stuck to facts they wouldn't be called out for propaganda?

Just look at the Parkland kids and the bullshit talking points they spewed. Brian Stelter openly admitted to allowing them to lie on his program, admitted he didn't push back.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
No, dude. There seems to be an embarrassingly large number of adults who are comfortable and content with insulting her intelligence, her appearance, her motivations, and even her mental health because they disagree with something she said or her stance on climate change in general. Many don't even bother to say why they disagree with her. It's enough for them to call her an annoying little b*tch or an autistic c*nt than to actually challenge what she is proposing.

That's not criticizing a child's ideas, that's just straight up venom. If they said the shit they were talking about her in person or online to her face, it would qualify as harrassment, if not child abuse.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think comparing Greta to the Parkland Survivors is a false comparison EA. The group has directly and indirectly suffered first hand acute trauma that will formulate there opinions, they have a stake, they have an understanding, they have a loss. Greta may have an understanding of climate data, she may have an awareness of what the future will bring but her behaviours are neither those of a normal adolescent or adult, they are extreme in an irrational way filtered by her autism and her lack of comprehension of how others behave and almost zero emotional intelligence cheapen a message, which would not be cheap when coming from an adult who has some social skills. She is a propaganda mouthpiece and a silly choice for one.

Dude no, they have an understanding of tragedy yes. They do not have an understanding of firearms because their tragedy involved firearms.

Hiding in a closet in a school while someone shoots at other kids doesn't magically grant you firearm knowledge.

Just like if I witnessed a close friend get hit by a car and killed I wouldn't suddenly be able to repair car engines the next day nor would I be some expect on car safety.

When a conservative speaks strongly about something he or she is just "overreacting" or is "angry"/"triggered" but when a leftist or a kid who is pushing leftist ideas does it they are "being passionate". 🙄

I guarantee if myself or any other conservative was strongly defending the 2nd amendment or the basic inherent right to life of unborn children lefties would not be calling it "being passionate" lol.

I'm just waiting for her to sail a boat over to China and talk to them about climate change.

lmao

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think comparing Greta to the Parkland Survivors is a false comparison EA. The group has directly and indirectly suffered first hand acute trauma that will formulate there opinions, they have a stake, they have an understanding, they have a loss. Greta may have an understanding of climate data, she may have an awareness of what the future will bring but her behaviours are neither those of a normal adolescent or adult, they are extreme in an irrational way filtered by her autism and her lack of comprehension of how others behave and almost zero emotional intelligence cheapen a message, which would not be cheap when coming from an adult who has some social skills. She is a propaganda mouthpiece and a silly choice for one.

I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

This kinda reminds me of the whole NFL kneeling thing. The cause they were kneeling for got overshadowed massively by the questions of if it was offensive to kneel, etc.

Greta's rants aren't winning over anyone who already wasn't on her side. And the attention she is getting from those not on her side is not of the sort that is leading to meaningful dialogue about climate change.

And she is trying to shame ANYONE who uses a plane. I mean, cuz hey f*ck you if you're an airline pilot. Learn to code?

Originally posted by Surtur
Maybe if they stuck to facts they wouldn't be called out for propaganda?

Just look at the Parkland kids and the bullshit talking points they spewed. Brian Stelter openly admitted to allowing them to lie on his program, admitted he didn't push back.

Again, that doesn't mean everything they say is right, but in their case, they got a lot of needless and nasty shit for sharing their opinions.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
They survived a mass shooting in which several classmates and school staff were killed. I'd hardly call their support for tougher gun laws propaganda.

Again, that doesn't mean everything they say is right, but in their case, they got a lot of needless and nasty shit for sharing their opinions.

Support for tougher gun laws wasn't the propaganda, the propaganda was pushing lies about guns in order to garner support for tougher gun laws.

And again: the shit they got came from the *lies* lol. Or at least that was the reason for the majority of the shit they got. It's like the female ghostbusters movie, sure some small percentage of folk shit on it just cuz they were sexist and it had women, but the vast majority was valid criticism cuz it was dog shit.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other. I missed DMB's post all becomes clear now. 👆

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

Originally posted by Surtur
This kinda reminds me of the whole NFL kneeling thing. The cause they were kneeling for got overshadowed massively by the questions of if it was offensive to kneel, etc.

Greta's rants aren't winning over anyone who already wasn't on her side. And the attention she is getting from those not on her side is not of the sort that is leading to meaningful dialogue about climate change.

And she is trying to shame ANYONE who uses a plane. I mean, cuz hey f*ck you if you're an airline pilot. Learn to code?

Definitely with you on your first two paragraphs, but you lost me on the third, Surt.

I think at that point it is up to the adults to recognize the need for things like planes in the modern world, but to also acknowledge and accept that we should be doing much more to produce clean energy and regulate industrial waste, then demand our governments to take action while making a more conscious effort to reduce our own footprint.

Instead, a great deal of the responses to her pleas and protests are pretty much, "F*ck you, autistic b*tch! I ain't changing shit! I like my truck!"

I think it's pathetic, and it'll be that kind of shitty attitude that'll inevitably doom our species, assuming a comet doesn't do it first.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Definitely with you on your first two paragraphs, but you lost me on the third, Surt.

I think at that point it is up to the adults to recognize the need for things like planes in the modern world, but to also acknowledge and accept that we should be doing much more to produce clean energy and regulate industrial waste, then demand our governments to take action while making a more conscious effort to reduce our own footprint.

Instead, a great deal of the responses to her pleas and protests are pretty much, "F*ck you, autistic b*tch! I ain't changing shit! I like my truck!"

I think it's pathetic, and it'll be that kind of shitty attitude that'll inevitably doom our species, assuming a comet doesn't do it first.

Originally posted by Surtur
Support for tougher gun laws wasn't the propaganda, the propaganda was pushing lies about guns in order to garner support for tougher gun laws.

And again: the shit they got came from the *lies* lol. Or at least that was the reason for the majority of the shit they got. It's like the female ghostbusters movie, sure some small percentage of folk shit on it just cuz they were sexist and it had women, but the vast majority was valid criticism cuz it was dog shit.

She may be a temporary 'propagandist' symbol (and frankly, I have no problem with that, especially considering the ethics and behavior of the opposition). Or, she may be the embryonic presence of a genuine, dominant force for the future. Only time will tell. After all, all great leaders were children once. For the moment though, let her do her thing. I don't agree that it hurts the cause; one could equally say she's an inspiration (given the focus of most children). If people make fun of her or dismiss her, that's saying a lot more about the opposition than about Greta.

Even bears avoid fights with wolverines.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
That's her core message and I agree totally it is better coming from members of the Scientific Community, for me she is being used in the same way the silly MAGA hat boy was used by the right.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Agree totally, also agree with Surt on his first two paragraphs.

I think it would probably matter more to her to see widespread environmental action implemented by governments and industry than any individual environmentalist purity.

I'm sure she'd love it if the world's focus shifted from her to the Scientific Community, and could rest assured real and significant changes were taking place.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I'm not familiar with it. What did they lie about?

You may or may not remember that in the aftermath we had folk going "this is the 18th school shooting this year!". Some of the people pushing that lie were the Parkland kids. The issue is the list used things like...cops chase a criminal onto school grounds and shoot him or...a student goes into a bathroom and kills himself with a gun.

Oh those technically are shootings that happened at schools, but alas we all know in this context when someone is saying "school shooting" they are talking about Parkland type situations.

Then there was "it's easier to buy a gun than it is cough medicine". Which isn't true.

Also they(and others) pushed a story about how a guy was able to buy an AR-15 in 5 minutes with no gun(never happened).

And of course we had CNN's Brian Stelter admitting to not correcting David Hogg when he said stuff that wasn't factual about guns.