Cont: Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed - part 3

[Helen]

I think she should learn a trade or master a body of knowledge, get a good-paying job, and donate her surplus funds to the causes of her choice. Even better if she learns some aspect of managing an NGO, fundraising, practical lobbying, or environmental engineering. Also fine if she goes into politics, and contributes directly to the process of policy change. Also fine if she chooses an academic path, gets a doctorate in some relevant field, and through her research contributes new things to our understanding of climate and ecology.

I agree, that is a good plan for anyone, but do you really think it is impossible to do both? A quick search also tells me that Greta is studying pol sci at uni.

 

[theprestige]

You're saying that she (and by extention, everyone else) shouldn't protest anything and that people should just get a job.

I'm saying that her form of protest is ineffectual posturing, and that she'd make a much bigger difference if she got a job that actually involved doing something. Especially if she got a job that involved mastering and applying the skills necessary to do the kinds of things she wants done.

The alternative being to become politically active through conventional means. How are those methods of limiting climate change working out, do you think?

Better than hers, as far as I can tell.

Do you think Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi should have just got a job? Maybe Emmeline Pankhurst should have learned a trade?

I think those people actually got things done via their activism.

This is, again, the carg-cult mentality that I despise. "King marched, and got things done, so when we march it's the same as getting things done!"

The deeply disturbed brave campaigner does a lot of marching, but gets little to nothing done. You're celebrating the wrong part of the work.

Your contention is ridiculous.

Thunberg's fan club is ridiculous.

 

[theprestige]

Religious fervour?

Yes.

Because I enjoy the idealism of young people?

Because you believe Thunberg's idealism could be having an invisible effect.

I am so sorry, theprestige, I promise to start a grassroot movement to make them get off your lawn immediately.

If you did that, you'd at least have a concrete, measurable change in the world, that you could point at, and be proud of. But I don't have a lawn, so maybe your efforts would be better spent elsewhere. Have you embraced flygskam?

 

[3point14]

'm saying that her form of protest is ineffectual posturing, and that she'd make a much bigger difference if she got a job that actually involved doing something. Especially if she got a job that involved mastering and applying the skills necessary to do the kinds of things she wants done.

Yeah, nobody's tallking about it at all...

Better than hers, as far as I can tell.

I think the political solutions offered to date have been 'not enough'. Ironically, this is her point. You seem to be teilling her to go and do that which she explicitly states (and I agree with her) that which she is protesting against.

I think those people actually got things done via their activism.

I strongly suspect that, as a million people marched, people with your attitude were saying exactly the same thing.

I think she thinks it's better to try and fail than to not try at all.

This is, again, the carg-cult mentality that I despise. "King marched, and got things done, so when we march it's the same as getting things done!"

The deeply disturbed brave campaigner does a lot of marching, but gets little to nothing done. You're celebrating the wrong part of the work.


Thunberg's fan club is ridiculous.

Lots of things seem rtidiculous to those that simply don't understand them.,

 

[3point14]

Religious fervour? Because I enjoy the idealism of young people? I am so sorry, theprestige, I promise to start a grassroot movement to make them get off your lawn immediately.

I should warn you about banging your head against a brick wall. But here I am with a large lump on my head.

You can lead a horse to water...

 

[theprestige]

Yeah, nobody's tallking about it at all...

Talk is cheap. Why are you celebrating talk without results?

I think the political solutions offered to date have been 'not enough'. Ironically, this is her point. You seem to be teilling her to go and do that which she explicitly states (and I agree with her) that which she is protesting against.

Not enough, perhaps, but still more than just talking about it and getting praised like that alone is making a difference.

I strongly suspect that, as a million people marched, people with your attitude were saying exactly the same thing.

I strongly suspect that they were not.

I think she thinks it's better to try and fail than to not try at all.

She's not actually trying anymore.

And when she was trying, it was only because people who should have known better continued to encourage and enable her even after it was clear that she wasn't succeeding, and was being used as a fig leaf by the very people who had no intention of actually doing what she asked.

Lots of things seem rtidiculous to those that simply don't understand them.,

And lots of things seem wonderful to those that simply don't understand them. Cults, for example.

 

[3point14]

Talk is cheap. Why are you celebrating talk without results?

Who's celebrating? I'm just not denigrating.

Not enough, perhaps, but still more than just talking about it and getting praised like that alone is making a difference.

Some would say not enough to make any difference

I strongly suspect that they were not.

I thought you might. I think you're wrong. Then again, perhaps that's just habit on my part.

She's not actually trying anymore.

And when she was trying, it was only because people who should have known better continued to encourage and enable her even after it was clear that she wasn't succeeding, and was being used as a fig leaf by the very people who had no intention of actually doing what she asked.


And lots of things seem wonderful to those that simply don't understand them. Cults, for example.

And a social conscience.

I am bored of your pecular blend of contrarianism and nihilism. Just bobbing about on a sea of pointlessness.

 

[Helen]

Have you embraced flygskam?

I am an old woman, and almost never (feel free to just read never, since it is closer to the truth, but I am trying to sound humble) feel shame about anything much, but I prefer travelling by train when I can for many reasons, one of them being the impact on our climate.

And just to be clear, I do not follow her. I was concerned about climate change long before she was even born, I read Rachel Carson's book when I was young, and have been aware of the ever increasing threat since then, but it does seem to me that her appearnce on the scene has made more people far more aware, and has swayed public opinion on its importance. I know that is just an opinion, but so is your argument that it has done no good at all.

Off to stand around on my own lawn now, possibly to shout at clouds - to ask them to come and cover us, mostly, since it is hotter over here in Europe than ever before.

 

[Stout]

Thunberg used to be wildly hilarious. All this stolen childhood trip, the speeches where she told politicians that they can't love their children unless they instantly instituted a total reorganization of society into some sort of fantasy scenario that she envisioned. I mean, she managed to guilt trip her mother into giving up flying and trashing her career, so why not try it out on the whole western world?

Then she actually got good. Once she realized that her supporters were full of crap and politicians were just treating her as a photo-op she entered her "blah blah blah" phase. No doubt everybody's watched her three part Documentary...A Year to Chance the World (not that stupid movie) and no doubt everybody's watched it multiple times. It was good.

But now? Now she's just another wonderbread activist with a name to sell. Boring!

 

[theprestige]

And just to be clear, I do not follow her. I was concerned about climate change long before she was even born, I read Rachel Carson's book when I was young, and have been aware of the ever increasing threat since then, but it does seem to me that her appearnce on the scene has made more people far more aware, and has swayed public opinion on its importance. I know that is just an opinion, but so is your argument that it has done no good at all.

My argument is that it has failed to accomplish or even approach its stated goal.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

, but it does seem to me that her appearnce on the scene has made more people far more aware, and has swayed public opinion on its importance.

It may seem that way, but the fact is, as has been discussed at length upthread, her activism has done nothing to change the behavior of any great numbers of people who could reduce human caused climate change, much less governments or industrial entities.

 

[dann]

What are you talking about, Skeptical Greg?
Several governments are already reducing anthropogenic CO₂ emissions. Take a look at the climate thread:
Denmark (see post 1,781)
China (see post 1,789)
And thanks to China, several other countries like e.g. Cuba and Indonesia (see post 1,794).

Meanwhile, countries like Canada (see post 1,803) and the USA (see post 1,945) are doing their utmost to increase CO₂ emissions while their forests are burning down.
But are you saying that that's Greta Thunberg's fault? Are you saying that changing "the behavior of any great numbers of people who could reduce human caused climate change" is the responsibility of one Swedish girl, and if it doesn't happen, she has failed humanity and the planet?

 

[theprestige]

But are you saying that that's Greta Thunberg's fault? Are you saying that changing "the behavior of any great numbers of people who could reduce human caused climate change" is the responsibility of one Swedish girl, and if it doesn't happen, she has failed humanity and the planet?

I'm saying that she failed in her own stated goal: To achieve drastic emissions reductions quickly. The people she wanted to convince were not convinced. The rapid change she called for never materialized.

And yet she is still celebrated for not getting anything done. She still gets credit for much smaller changes that were happening anyway.

 

[dann]

It's very easy to say that the changes that happened would have happened anyway. It's a bit like claiming that vaccines are unnecessary because hardly anyone gets polio nowadays.

Did Thunberg ever claim that she, Greta Thunberg, she alone, could bring about "drastic emissions reductions quickly"? She was talking about the necessity of reducing emissions. And a lot of young people seem to have understood the message.

By the way, when did she get "credit for much smaller changes"? I don't remember seeing or hearing anybody claim that China's reduction of CO2 emissions is due to Thunberg, and I think that she herself would be the first to call the idea absurd.

If you want to see a monumental failure, you should look at the people allegedly making America great again. And they are a whole ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ movement, and one of them is the leader of the USA.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

What are you talking about, Skeptical Greg?
Several governments are already reducing anthropogenic CO₂ emissions. Take a look at the climate thread:
Denmark (see post 1,781)
China (see post 1,789)
And thanks to China, several other countries like e.g. Cuba and Indonesia (see post 1,7
Meanwhile, countries like Canada (see post 1,803) and the USA (see post 1,945) are doing their utmost to increase CO₂ emissions while their forests are burning down.

Global CO2 emissions by year 1940-2024| Statista

Annual global carbon dioxide emissions have increased by more than 60 percent since 1990 and are now at their highest ever levels.

www.statista.com

Only dip was the pandemic.

But are you saying that that's Greta Thunberg's fault?

Where did I say that?

Are you saying that changing "the behavior of any great numbers of people who could reduce human caused climate change" is the responsibility of one Swedish girl, and if it doesn't happen, she has failed humanity and the planet?

Again, nothing there that I said.

I'm just saying her activism has been ineffective. All we are talking about here is Greta Thunberg and her effect on climate change.

Since it's getting worse, would you say it's her fault? I wouldn't say that.

 

[jt512]

I'm just saying her activism has been ineffective. All we are talking about here is Greta Thunberg and her effect on climate change.

Since it's getting worse, would you say it's her fault?

Given the amount of hot air she produces, the hypothesis is tenable.

 

[Stout]

Thunberg's big thing was to tell people to go out and vote.

In China, and it's economic bitch Cuba, nobody's voting for anyone other than the ruling party. So, um, yay authoritarian regimes?

 

[theprestige]

What are you talking about, Skeptical Greg?
Several governments are already reducing anthropogenic CO₂ emissions. Take a look at the climate thread:
Denmark (see post 1,781)
China (see post 1,789)
And thanks to China, several other countries like e.g. Cuba and Indonesia (see post 1,794).

Meanwhile, countries like Canada (see post 1,803) and the USA (see post 1,945) are doing their utmost to increase CO₂ emissions while their forests are burning down.
But are you saying that that's Greta Thunberg's fault? Are you saying that changing "the behavior of any great numbers of people who could reduce human caused climate change" is the responsibility of one Swedish girl, and if it doesn't happen, she has failed humanity and the planet?

Last time I checked, China wasn't reducing their GHG emissions, they were just reducing their GHG emissions as a percentage of their overall energy production. So actually increasing their GHG emissions.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Last time I checked, China wasn't reducing their GHG emissions, they were just reducing their GHG emissions as a percentage of their overall energy production. So actually increasing their GHG emissions.

Clean energy just put China’s CO2 emissions into reverse for first time

The new analysis for Carbon Brief shows that China’s emissions were down 1.6% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025 and by 1% in the latest 12 months.

The reduction in China’s first-quarter CO2 emissions in 2025 was due to a 5.8% drop in the power sector. While power demand grew by 2.5% overall, there was a 4.7% drop in thermal power generation – mainly coal and gas... Increases in solar, wind and nuclear power generation, driven by investments in new generating capacity, more than covered the growth in demand.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Thunberg's big thing was to tell people to go out and vote.

In China, and it's economic bitch Cuba, nobody's voting for anyone other than the ruling party. So, um, yay authoritarian regimes?

Yes. No need to vote out the ruling party when it's doing the right thing.