[cgriswald]

> Parallels with contemporary climate deniers is stunning.

You're right. I agree with you.

But–and I say this with all respect and no judgment–I think the insight here is not to point at one's perceived opponents and say, "Yes! This describes my experience with them perfectly!"; but to ask oneself who are the screamers in ones own life who get one's own glossy-eyed stare.

It is very difficult and often impossible to pop someone else's bubble, so we should all work hard on popping our own.

As for the average climate denier[0], I won't defend them, but I'll say this: They're wrong about the climate, but they're screaming about something.

[0]By which I mean those who are sincere and not well-funded, financially motivated deceivers.

Edit: Formatting.

[emmelaich]

Regarding Arhur Koestler and bubbles popping ... apparently he was a rapist and narcissist.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/feb/21/arthur-koestle...

and convinced his healthy wife to commit suicide with him.

[mannykannot]

> It is very difficult and often impossible to pop someone else's bubble, so we should all work hard on popping our own.

Huh? they won't listen to reason, so I should do what, exactly?

[PavlovsCat]

I don't know, maybe pretend e.g. the Nazis were convinced of the errors of their ways -- rather than defeated first militarily, and then shamed socially.

I'd say, "what you should do" is to organize with others and enforce boundaries on those who are in the "bubble" of not giving a (meaningful) fuck of continued organized existence of the human race. Deal with the mote in your own eye, just to shut Jesus up, and then get to work on the speck of dust in the eye of your neighbour. Turns out size doesn't matter, but what it blocks the view of, and that's one hell of a speck of dust.

The mote probably never meant shit in comparison but do it anyway, get rid of attack surface for people who are looking for excuses to not confront anyone in earnest. As if just knowing about Auschwitz was possible in a vacuum, without making oneself an enemy of the Nazis. They are obedient now, they will fall in line when you achieve critical mass with people who are worth their salt. So completely forget them until they do better, if they ever do. Don't put more stock in them than they themselves did. Focus on those who are not just a drain of resources, but that pollinate and challenge you in a way that leaves you and them better.

And notice the irony of you being downvoted without reply, instead of that downvoter instead criticizing something about themselves. You're supposed to not "think you're better than others", or consider your concerns more important than theirs -- but people will absolutely consider themselves better than you for allegedly not considering themselves better as others. But that's not for them to realize, I guess.

[mmirate]

> I'd say, "what you should do" is to organize with others and enforce boundaries on those who are in the "bubble" of not giving a (meaningful) fuck of continued organized existence of the human race.

Dumb question here: why should I give a fuck about literally anything that happens after I die?

[eseehausen]

Because people (or even projects) you love may outlive you? It can provide immediate visceral satisfaction to try to help boost them even if you won't see the benefits. Children are a good example of this, but there are many others (legacies, societies, proteges, lovers).

[PavlovsCat]

Why should you... not get between a lioness and her cubs? Well, just because she doesn't yet realize that you're doing that, doesn't mean she never will. The question is really just how thick you think this ice is, and if you feel particularly lucky. The question isn't so much why should you care, but if you don't care, what leg do you have to stand on in regards to others?

Why would you care, that's the better question IMO. Maybe because you have been treated well, because you can afford it, because if you have greater capacity for care than neediness. That is, maybe after you spent all the care you possibly can on yourself, you still have plenty left and might as well use it. Because your daily income of ability to care is more than your expenses on just yourself.

I've known stinking rich egotists as well as rich people with a huge heart, and the latter seemed happier and more intelligent by far. No contest, I'd even say they're actually living in the first place, while those who care only about themselves are boring at best, constantly whining at worst. And just like there's networks of sociopaths, just like "the devil recognizes his brethren", so do people with functioning hearts and brains recognize others, and I dare say they're much better company. Better looking, too, even just insofar that being able to look any- and everyone in the eye makes a person instantly more attractive, all else being equal. And that's before age kicks in.. reaping the rewards of a selfish life is truly brutal, and the most cruel part is that after a life of selfishness you have no ability to recognize the consequences of that as consequences of that.