Malthus was a fascist and you’re a fascist for repeating his bullshit.
Now back on topic: I’m pretty sure the couple companies that are mostly based on fossil fuels being responsible for around 90% of greenhouse gases are the main contributors to climate change, not meat production, even if it contributes too.
It’s a bit extreme to call them a fascist when they likely are just ill-informed on the actual carrying capacity of the earth. If our standards are so high that we don’t have room for people to be wrong and to learn before calling them a fascist, then we’ll actively push people away from wanting to learn.
Someone who is “fairly certain” has done, I assume, their own research. If in the end they discover Malthusianism and found it so fitting that they ascribe to it, they have ascribed to fascist ideology.
I understand where you’re coming from, but at some point we have to stop saying that people who have every information at their fingertips(the internet), and a world-vetted source if information (wikipedia) very accessible to them, it becomes a farcical ritual to keep defending them via ignorance, when it is, at best, learned incompetence and at worst full throated Nazi ideology.
in a world of anonymity, I like to judge people by their actions. And repeating fascist ideology makes someone fascist, in my eyes, especially when they double-down after it’s pointed out.
Malthus was a fascist and you’re a fascist for repeating his bullshit.
Now back on topic: I’m pretty sure the couple companies that are mostly based on fossil fuels being responsible for around 90% of greenhouse gases are the main contributors to climate change, not meat production, even if it contributes too.
Fascism is a far right ideology. I’m very far left.
You seem to use “fascist” as an ad hominem fallacy.
you can claim whatever the shit you want. Doesn’t change that you repeat fascist talking points, which makes you a fascist.
I am using fascist as a descriptor, not a repeat of claimed identity.
You’re using it to attempt to discredit my statement.
That’s the ad hominem logical fallacy.
If I’m wrong, show me data, and I’ll retract my statement.
It’s a bit extreme to call them a fascist when they likely are just ill-informed on the actual carrying capacity of the earth. If our standards are so high that we don’t have room for people to be wrong and to learn before calling them a fascist, then we’ll actively push people away from wanting to learn.
Someone who is “fairly certain” has done, I assume, their own research. If in the end they discover Malthusianism and found it so fitting that they ascribe to it, they have ascribed to fascist ideology.
I understand where you’re coming from, but at some point we have to stop saying that people who have every information at their fingertips(the internet), and a world-vetted source if information (wikipedia) very accessible to them, it becomes a farcical ritual to keep defending them via ignorance, when it is, at best, learned incompetence and at worst full throated Nazi ideology.
in a world of anonymity, I like to judge people by their actions. And repeating fascist ideology makes someone fascist, in my eyes, especially when they double-down after it’s pointed out.