Yes, opinions about which foods people prefer. Not “opinions” on the factuality of scientific knowledge (which is a large part of what feeds into discord at the political level— avoidably so).
There is a large range of things people are fully entitled to have a sane-but-politically-aligned opinion on between inconsequential matters of taste and the scientifically quantifiable quality of the world we live in.
For example things such as:
-should universities be state subsidised or should there be tuition.
-If state needs to raise more taxes what
type of tax should they increase; sales tax or income tax.
- should there be a tobacco tax or should tobacco be made illegal
- should cocaine be legalized
Etc etc mundane things.
This is not unrelated to all other things - these all are political issues. There is no ”lane b” for matters of urgency unless there is an imminent disaster looming. All matters need to churn through the same machine - sales tax incease of 0.1 % as well as specific environmental matters.
The biggest villain here is not humnanity. It’s the hydrocarbon companies and families (Koch!) that have fucked up the political dialogue by first seeding ”skepticism” and then making a matter scientific urgency a political negotiable thing.
The machine is what it is, and it’s capable of doing great things. Some fucktards have just intentionally loosened a few gears and somebody would need to fix the mess.
Now, one must point out that the fossil fuels burned have not just disappeared as smoke in the air. We’ve used them to keep the wheels of civilization spinning and in a way it’s not just folks like Koch that have profited but we all have profited from fossil fuel based world order (see for example ’How the world really works’ by Smil). So, in a way all consumers in the industrial world have been benefitted materially - which also explains why there are so many vested interests not too keen to energetically debunk the ”climate skeptics”. Yeah. Everything I own I own mostly because of cheap industrial goods and food in whose production fossil fuels have played an important part.
So it’s not a simple thing to fix. But it’s all down to the same machine.
For example things such as:
-should universities be state subsidised or should there be tuition.
-If state needs to raise more taxes what type of tax should they increase; sales tax or income tax.
- should there be a tobacco tax or should tobacco be made illegal
- should cocaine be legalized
Etc etc mundane things.
This is not unrelated to all other things - these all are political issues. There is no ”lane b” for matters of urgency unless there is an imminent disaster looming. All matters need to churn through the same machine - sales tax incease of 0.1 % as well as specific environmental matters.
The biggest villain here is not humnanity. It’s the hydrocarbon companies and families (Koch!) that have fucked up the political dialogue by first seeding ”skepticism” and then making a matter scientific urgency a political negotiable thing.
The machine is what it is, and it’s capable of doing great things. Some fucktards have just intentionally loosened a few gears and somebody would need to fix the mess.
Now, one must point out that the fossil fuels burned have not just disappeared as smoke in the air. We’ve used them to keep the wheels of civilization spinning and in a way it’s not just folks like Koch that have profited but we all have profited from fossil fuel based world order (see for example ’How the world really works’ by Smil). So, in a way all consumers in the industrial world have been benefitted materially - which also explains why there are so many vested interests not too keen to energetically debunk the ”climate skeptics”. Yeah. Everything I own I own mostly because of cheap industrial goods and food in whose production fossil fuels have played an important part.
So it’s not a simple thing to fix. But it’s all down to the same machine.