Let's be frank. Drag queens pose a much greater threat right now. I'm so grateful for that focus. And, on Disney, with Mickey going into the public domain, we can't have him woke as well.

But maybe that's the trick on both sides. Western state politicians focus on what's happening in Florida rather than on their own backyard. Florida focuses on drag queens and the stench of San Francisco. I do see a lot of damage to the morale of teachers in Florida, however, done by local Florida politicians.

I know you're OT but I'm still rebutting the fully false insinuation here. I have been active with sexual assault survivors for more decades than most here have been alive. Actual sexual grooming is properly defined by those who've experienced it.

The overwhelming sexual threat to children and women has always been straight men. That is physics-level reality.

I've been thoroughly down voted and I should be, as sarcasm isn't helpful here on HN.

I'm 100% in agreement with you.

I understand. With kindness, I suggest that your phrasing may have been indistinguishable from the actual propaganda.

Text is hard tho. I've certainly done similar. Maybe recently.

That's why it is great we are actually in conversation and not just reading sound bites. Nice to meet you and look forward to making the world a better place together!

(I think OP was joking)

Should have used the /s tag then to be clear.

Aye, perhaps, and in poor taste.

Don’t look up!

Don’t look to politicians to solve these problems.

Presumably politicians execute the collective will of the people. Otherwise it wouldn't be a democracy. Of course there is some wiggle-room for corruption, but in a decent system that's limited in those areas people care about.

Right now, a lot of the political apathy can feed off the fact that the average voter is pretty old in most Western countries, so climate change will have limited impact on them. So maybe motivating these voters is the way to go.

> Presumably politicians execute the collective will of the people. Otherwise it wouldn’t be a democracy.

And, arguably, its not, even in what are perceived as “democracies”, because a narrow elite controls the media narratives (even the apparent conflicts in the media are largely between factions of that narrow capitalist elite), controls public perception of reality and the available perceived space of political options, and thereby directs society even in the presence of the superficial forms of democracy.

It is more than time for many people, preferable the majority, to talk with politicians. Really talk with them. Have a very large strike. Express concerns loudly. Everywhere. Everybody.

In Europe some people are gluing themselves to roads. This won't work because this riles up people, but we should rile up politicians, not people.

About five years ago I switched my attitude from: "We will find a solution" to: "I hope we will find a solution". I am not very hopeful.

> This won't work because this riles up people, but we should rile up politicians, not people.

There's a well-known essay that explains why this is effective. It's titled, "Letter From a Birmingham Jail”. Highly recommended.

I am sure I don't understand all the nuances, but let's fantasize: what if celebrities glue themselves to roads? Imagine King Charles III, Roger Federer, Tina Turner, Gérard Dépardieu, David Beckham and others...

What doe celebrities have to do with anything?

Who then? Individual action cannot make a dent. Corporations? Maybe when there is a profit incentive I’ll believe it.

Invent the technology that solves the problem. In this case, modular nuclear reactors and/or fusion, and diamondoid molecular nanotechnology. The former gives us a nearly limitless source of carbon-free energy, while the later moves our technology base off of refined metals (which emit CO2 in production) and into using carbon itself as the fundamental base material, making carbon capture and even atmospheric drawdown profitable.

Don't fall into the doomerism trap and fear mongering orthodoxy. Climate deaths are at an all time low, global poverty at a low, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago, the Great Barrier reef is coming back. It has more coral now than in 36 years. The Earth and technology can handle it just fine.

Climate ‘doomers’ are replacing climate ‘deniers’. U.N. reports and confusing headlines created a generation of doomers:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/03/2...

If the world would just consist of the USA, Canada and Europe I would agree, we could handle it just fine. It will be expensive, especially in infrastructure costs due to sea level rise. Transitioning our forests to species adapted to higher temperatures will be a pain, same for changes in our agriculture, but we would be fine.

The problem are the nations with megacities at the coast, but no money to build massive sea walls. Or the nations that are already at the edge of survivable (wet-bulb) temperatures in the summer, but little AC coverage (and often too little electricity to meaningfully increase AC rollout, even if they had the money). Or the nations that have to compete with their neighbors over water sources for drinking and agriculture. Those nations will all be in significant trouble. Which will probably mean migrant waves that will be on an entirely different scale compared to what we are used to, and quite possibly beyond what we can handle. But at the same time, both it's hard to stop desperate people from moving (morally and physically)

Oh, so the mitigations are barely starting to work and we should increase our efforts since the net effect is working (no way have we reached full diminishing marginal returns).

Cool. Agreed, doomerism is the wrong approach. But there is still massive cause for concern, and we should proceed forward.

American politicians have recently been on a bit of a catch up for lost time.

And obviously some (at all levels from cities up) have been working away for decades. And that's not even counting the rest of the world where climate change is less of a political hot potato. Though yes more could and should have been done.

So I'm not sure a blanket "politicians are terrible" is a particularly good take. It both lets the real guilty parties off the hook while simultaneously blaming the blameless.