Katherine Jebsen Moore: "When Children Protest, Adults Should Tell Them The Truth"
Agreed.
Feinstein basically did it basically right, IMO, if a bit crotchety-y. Though 16 isn't exactly a child, and the kids Feinstein got grumpy with were much younger--and more clearly programmed.
One thing: Thunberg is basically just saying what zillions adults are saying. I'm inclined to doubt that the apocalypse is nigh...but what do I know? Thunberg speaks with a bit of added authority because she's supposed to be someone with a personal stake in the matter, seeing as how she may very well live to 2100; thus she'd still be alive when the shit begins hitting the fan, if the most dire predictions are true. Thus the question is more vital for her than for us.
Moore's right that much of Thunberg's argument is silly--e.g. the claim that we're doing absolutely nothing about the problem. It seems to me that Moore also hints at--but doesn't come right out and say--that Thunberg may very well be in the grip of other fads, as well--she claims to be "on the spectrum," and to be subject to several mental disorders. Climate-change hysteria may just be part of a pattern with her. Though there's no reason to be terribly anti-Thunberg. She knows not what she does--not much of it, anyway. What's annoying is that she's being elevated to guru-status by the climate-change hysteriacs. It's a bit difficult to avoid the hunch that she's being used as a kind of curiosity to advance an agenda...but what really matters are her arguments...which aren't any better than anyone else's.
I will say that I hate what I think of as done deal arguments. My dean loves those. Thunberg's goes like this:
Feinstein basically did it basically right, IMO, if a bit crotchety-y. Though 16 isn't exactly a child, and the kids Feinstein got grumpy with were much younger--and more clearly programmed.
One thing: Thunberg is basically just saying what zillions adults are saying. I'm inclined to doubt that the apocalypse is nigh...but what do I know? Thunberg speaks with a bit of added authority because she's supposed to be someone with a personal stake in the matter, seeing as how she may very well live to 2100; thus she'd still be alive when the shit begins hitting the fan, if the most dire predictions are true. Thus the question is more vital for her than for us.
Moore's right that much of Thunberg's argument is silly--e.g. the claim that we're doing absolutely nothing about the problem. It seems to me that Moore also hints at--but doesn't come right out and say--that Thunberg may very well be in the grip of other fads, as well--she claims to be "on the spectrum," and to be subject to several mental disorders. Climate-change hysteria may just be part of a pattern with her. Though there's no reason to be terribly anti-Thunberg. She knows not what she does--not much of it, anyway. What's annoying is that she's being elevated to guru-status by the climate-change hysteriacs. It's a bit difficult to avoid the hunch that she's being used as a kind of curiosity to advance an agenda...but what really matters are her arguments...which aren't any better than anyone else's.
I will say that I hate what I think of as done deal arguments. My dean loves those. Thunberg's goes like this:
“We have come here,” Thunberg proclaims, “to let you know that change is coming, whether you like it or not. The real power belongs to the people.”Your agency is impotent, feckless, you see. Thunberg's side was right all along, on the right side of history. You might deny it, but the world is about to show you the error of your ways. History is unfolding as they knew it would. Though...that seems to mean that the changes Thunberg wants are already inevitable...so...WTF is she wasting her time on? Climate change is already solved, because the left is right, and the proof of that is that their view will be accepted. So...I guess everything's cool then, right? We Neanderthals just can't see that yet...
posted by Winston Smith at
4:09 PM
1 Comments:
"I will say that I hate what I think of as done deal arguments. My dean loves those."
I despise these as well, and I think it's because there's the obvious implication that the person making them is cravenly obsessed with power. No concern with unintended consequences, uncertainty, all the difficulties that come with trying to wrestle with the truth of the matter. Just we're right and you will follow us, dammit.
And of course, it's terrifying how rare it is that the Left doesn't follow this nakedly dogmatic argumentative form.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home