|
|
|
|
|
by jonhohle
2914 days ago
|
|
I don’t need to accept that the earth is flat to fight for increased government transparency (something flat earthers would be interested in). I don’t need to deny climate change to find other benefits to promote more efficient energy use. I think most people would agree that the US healthcare system is overly-expensive, complicated, and excludes a vulnerable portion of the population. That doesn’t mean the right solution is federal health insurance or even single payer. tl;dr I don’t need to change someone else’s beliefs to work towards mutually beneficial goals. |
|
can you show me anything (other than your most charitable interpretation of the realization of that political identity) that suggests this is what they want?
>I don’t need to deny climate change to find other benefits to promote more efficient energy use.
can you explain to me why we should operate this way? sure i can come up with all sorts of alternative explanations for why environmentally friendly energy sources are good (solar jobs blah blah blah) that might be more amenable to climate-change deniers but why does it have to be this way?
how about anti-vaxxers and the like? how about birthers? how about sovereign-citizens? how many different narratives do i need to construct in order to get buy-in for something that's rigorously verified and people are simply obdurate with respect to? is the reason that that's how it is now because certain groups have as much power as they do?
>I don’t need to change someone else’s beliefs to work towards mutually beneficial goals.
there are people with whom you do not have common cause. or maybe not you. but there are certainly peoples that are marginalized to such an extent that they do not have common cause with any in power. should they being playing these creative games as well?