• Floon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not taking it personally: hyper-progressive policies that require achievements in infrastructure change orders of magnitude more costly and complicated than any other event in human history described as “just something folks have to do” as if it’s that easy, as if they’re not just happening because of half a dozen car company CEOs… they just make me queasy that you’re an ally of mine in our desire to fight global warming.

    • Sopje [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lmao you are not an ally in fighting global warming if you don’t support major changes in infrastructure. You are taking this way too personally, you’re in a fuck_cars community crying about how we shouldn’t be mean about cars.

      You can agree that EV’s are a non-solution while still accepting that you live in a place that’s so fucked up that it doesn’t provide you with an alternative.

      • Floon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, I’m saying that removed about EVs does what, exactly? The infrastructure change you’re glib about happens how? You haven’t even thought of that. You have a goal, but no map from here to there. You’re still stuck at the fuck cars stage it seems.

        Try to actually solve the problem instead of removed about incremental solutions that don’t do enough for your taste.