• PhreakyByNature
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t think it’s “prioritise humans over the planet” but more “we should be able to look after one another as a base level of being human. If we can’t figure that out how the hell can we focus on bigger things like the planet”. Not saying what we should and shouldn’t do but just throwing shade at our ability.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      For example, we’re quickly making the planet too hot for some people to live where their homes are. We should find ways to stop heating up the planet to help them!

    • FictionalCrow@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Honestly at this point I’d accept eco fascism. Arguing about “taking care of each other” while life support is failing and we enter triage levels of failure is inane

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        the problem there is it requires a power base to enforce - and all the power bases seemed determined to drive off the cliff (some are tapping the brakes but the rest are full throttle and rolling coal for lulz) at one speed or another - and a military industrial complex large enough to be strategically effective would be (like the US army) one of the largest polluters in the world.

        I want something to change, I just don’t see ecofascism ( a really bad term btw ) as a possible avenue.

        Victor Von Doom levels of resources/soverign agency might be able to. I think us humans are going to be a sad end note in some other species’ extraterrestrial archeology, after so many of them run into our radio and other emissions.