________


what this teenager has accomplished

she was only 15 when when she addressed the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference

she's a great inspiration to a lot of people

I'm a very big fan

.

.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59110122


.

She's a great kid. But does anyone think she is going to influence those who deny climate change or who have become anti-science? She might hurt the cause in that respect. We don't need a spokesperson who will justify the anxieties of the Right in their own minds. Maybe if she brings more young people into the movement that would cancel out the antagonisms she worsens.

She seems emblematic of the Left's complete failure to relate to the typical American or typical world conservative. Thinking like "yeah this beautiful symbolic child will make inspire anyone. Yes! Up that sass volume!" is what an irrelevant hippie would think.

Ill give her this much she is right about all the politicians at the summit
blah blah blah

Though she does not speak up for all the child labor to mine these minerals for the lithium Batteries and solar panels

Greed will always win out

Sigh. Open any climate change thread and it doesn't take too long to read one of these big brain, gotcha takes.

On second thought it's always a girl, always. Because she is is cute and vulnerable. That's what the far right is saying too I think. Put a boy in front of the masses and nobody listens. But she does have a good effect on things. Even though I think it seems fakish andn theatralic sometimes. (Either she doesn't know how she comes across/ bad acting/ or badly instructed) I don't know what it is, it seems like a bad acting job sometimes imo too overdone and hysterical. Maybe Im stupid and thats exaxlty what she needs to do. The content is excellent though. We do have a problem and nobody uncaring about it. Consumption and production as if there is no tomorrow.

She is doing the same thing as the other girl 30 ago. ^
Only then there was no social media.

One of the greatest environmental minds of the 21st century. People attacking a child are cowards and closet science deniers

LOL.

So what if she doesn't? She can make a lot of good inspiring a segment of people even if she isn't effective at changing the minds of anti-science denialists. Like if that is the yardstick, almost everything fails against it.

It's like an election. One school of thought says you should be motivating your base and you focus on GoTV operations and so forth to drive up excitement and commitment in your base. Another says to prioritize persuasion and appealing to the moderates in the middle who might move one way or another. But it isn't like Biden is going to be convincing the Jan 6th truthers that he really got elected, and that isn't really a relevant political yardstick.

But if you needed to convince the Jan 6th truthers that Trump lost legitimately, would you choose a foreign teenage girl as your communicator?

I'm not sure the base in your analogy needs rallying. The problem are the intransigent/fearful or greedy people who think environmental destruction is preferable to a compromised economy of any duration. We need to get some of those people to change their minds in order to give any better environmental legislation any prospects for passing. And it needs to be the American intransigent who are targeted, because we still have economic weight to throw around globally. Thunberg does nothing to those people who should be targeted other than further entrench them.

Then again I don't know that there is any way to reach those we need to reach. That points to a fatalist tinge to Thunberg's ascension, giving up on trying to communicate and just saying what you what to say however you want to say it with no real goal in mind other than the projection of your ideology- in other words just giving up totally and trading material progress for some temporary gratification which is better than nothing.

Oh noes, the dumbest people one the planet aren’t listening to Greta, maybe we just need a less female messenger.

I don't know how to reach those people. In fact - and here's one for the Deuces Anthology - I think we should literally go to war with them. It's worth it. Because they aren't dumb they're just greedy and there might be no appeals possible.

Now the libs are using children as human shields, just like terrorists.

I deleted my post since I don't want to be the one.

Exactly my thoughts, children at that age could be instumentalised as i think no child at that age says what she says without the backup I think she is getting from her parents. Not saying her parents are dumb people or wrong though.

I think you need to look up her age - she is not a child.

If she is in the public arena, she has to face the criticism when she engages in debate.

But the hatred, threats, the horrifyingly creepy commentary when she was still a child and the creepy commentary which still persists from science deniers on social media is out of place in a civilized society.

Other than that, her viewpoint is understandable. Our generation and the generation before us will be handing over an over-exploited world; we exhaust more resources than we renew and cause more damage than the world can naturally regenerate. This means we're continuously degrading that generation's future.

For us, this is hard to understand. Most of us grew up in a world of progress. That isn't to say prospects were perfect, but the work of previous of generations was largely a boon, not a curse.

I think she's great. I get her frustration being involved in politics and having to hear the same empty words and promises again and again. And meeting a lot of people who just don't have any real understanding of the problem she's trying to talk about.

Attacks on her are obviously ridiculous, but at least a little bit funny, just brainwashed people claiming her to be brainwashed, when in any conversation with her about climate change (or probably anything) they'd end up looking like apes. And not even figuring out that if you're constantly harassing a young activist to try to support your argument on scientific things, maybe you just shouldn't, you "might" be wrong?

Thread is achieving previously unknown levels of bad.

This is of course correct.
This is why we should lower the voting age. If the interests of younger people are increasingly diverging from those of older people we should grant them more direct political representation.

I think lowering the voting age is fine only if it is coupled with the lowering of the age in which parents are legally responsible to take care of their own children.

"If you're old enough to vote, you're old enough to make your own living."

I think everything that’s legal for adults should be legal when you’re 17. No exceptions. If you’re old enough to die in a war you’re old enough to do any legal adult activity.

I just looked it up. U have got to be f kidding me! She is 18 years old and guess what she will be 19 in January. I thought she was 15 years old! That was 3 years ago huh?? Pfff times go fast... anyways she is 1.5 meters and looks like 14 still to me. Heard she has mild autism. Don't know if that's true or not.

Please dont tell me you sent 17 years old to Iraq. (Not you, the usa)