[GuB-42]

It is easy to start working on it when you are rich, but people in the world aren't, and they aren't because we are and we exploit them. And these people don't care about how terrible the next centuries are going to be because they need to survive right now, so climate change is not a priority.

It is kind of depressing, really. We can't even agree on not killing each other. I mean, no one wants to get killed right, and the solution to this is the simplest there is, we just need to collectively decide not to kill. And if we did that, just consider how much resources it would free up: military, security, no need to rebuild what war has destroyed if there is no war.

So if we can't simply decide not to kill each other even though it would be a net, immediate benefit, how deciding to care for climate, which will involve at least a global reduction in comfort for many years before things get better is going to work?

[mmooss]

Wow, people are really advocates of helplessness. Warfare is a great example:

It has gone on for all of history, yet people working together have mostly eliminated it - exactly what you say. It has gone on for all of history, and most of what humans have acheived by working together have been done contemporaneously with it.

[esseph]

"Modern Life May Be Pushing Human Minds Beyond Their Limits, Reflecting an Evolutionary Mismatch"

https://www.sciencealert.com/modern-life-may-be-pushing-huma...

[watwut]

This has it other way round. The ones who will be hit by climate change the worst are the poor. It wont be "the next century" either. They also can not do all that much about it.

The ones who actively prevent collective measures to stop the climate change are the richest of the rich. And they also spend pretty significant money on lies and propaganda designed to prevent collective work against climate change.