[pezzana]

The structure of this essay sets up the paired positions as opposing ideologically, but it's not clear that they are.

Take this for example:

> It’s like, what do you call someone who’s absolutely terrified about global warming, and who thinks the best response would’ve been (and actually, still is) a historic surge in nuclear energy, possibly with geoengineering to tide us over?

The Democratic Party has recently endorsed nuclear power:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2020/08/23/after-48...

Republicans seem on board as well:

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/543267-house-r...

Others appear to be tautologies:

> … who wants to end world hunger … and do it using GMO crops?

I have yet to see anyone promote GMO as a way to make better tasting crops. It's always painted as a way to better feed the planet and reduce starvation. To support GMO seems to be an affirmation for ending world hunger. At least it would be entertaining to see someone try to argue that that's not the best use of GMO.

Still other opinions are often heard, but when push comes to shove, actively opposed. For example:

> … who supports free speech, to the point of proudly tolerating views that really, actually disgust them at their workplace, university, or online forum?

Yet:

> … who believes in patriotism, the police, the rule of law, to the extent that they don’t understand why all the enablers of the January 6 insurrection, up to and including Trump, aren’t currently facing trial for treason against the United States?

Those who participated didn't think of themselves as traitors. They thought of themselves as doing their patriotic duty, exercising their Constitutional rights of speech and assembly, and their moral right of action against tyranny. They may be delusional, but that's how they describe themselves. Not coincidentally unlike the lawbreakers who interfered with nuclear weapons research, animal cruelty practices, racial discrimination, the British occupation, the Vietnam War, and abortion clinics.

[bobsmooth]

>The Democratic Party has recently endorsed nuclear power:

The platform quote is basically lip-service to nuclear fans. Quite different from the Manhattan-Project-level of a response I imagine the author is in favour of.

>Others appear to be tautologies

There are a lot of opponents of GMO crops that consider themselves liberal or progressive.

>Those who participated didn't think of themselves as traitors.

Those that protested outside are not traitors. Those that broke into the Capitol building, with the intent to stop the count or not, committed treason. Trying to overthrow the government is not speech. Yeah the founding fathers were treasonous, but they were successful.

[8note]

Manhattan level?

How does poisoning abunch of poor island people help global warming?

[bobsmooth]

In 4 years nuclear weapons went from theory to testing the first bomb. $20 billion spent in that time to construct an entire nuclear industry. The largest building in the world, K-25, was built in 2 years with 25000 workers and employed up to 50000 in the surrounding area. That's the level of commitment I'm talking about.

[mattcwilson]

I believe GP is using a metaphor to describe a certain level of zeal and committed research funding from the government, as compared to a slogan in a newspaper article.

Certainly nuclear power generation has almost nothing to do with nuclear weapons testing.

[mtsr]

I’ve mostly seen nuclear and GMO being promoted as a way to earn money by the promoter, their employer or their friends. Nuclear or GMO to improve the world is certainly an option but undoubtedly looks different than privatizing the profits and socializing the risks. And I’m convinced it would also be treated differently in the public debate (to an extent anyway) if approached in a different way.

[commandlinefan]

> unlike the lawbreakers who interfered with nuclear weapons research, animal cruelty practices, and abortion clinics

Or set government buildings on fire in response to George Floyd's death (which the police officer found responsible for was later sentenced to decades in prison for). Or who did the exact same thing the Jan 6 "insurrectionists" did to shut down Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation.

[dataangel]

Remind me how many people died at the confirmation and how many people walked around with zip ties to use on Congress?

[commandlinefan]

Well just FYI, the only person who died on Jan. 6 (at the capitol building, anyway) was Ashley Babbitt, who was shot by the capitol police.