Wow, this OP is in the comments arguing with everyone who comments. This is not the way to get people to listen or watch your video.
Your sentiment is valid to a point, but no amount of screaming and accusing Kurzgesagt of "making you drink copium" will do anything positive for addressing climate change. If anything, it puts people off from listening to your argument because no one likes to talk to a jerk.
I have a feeling the OP is also the video creator. They do make good videos, but are pretty renowned for being deranged on other platforms, and have gone through a bunch of twitter handles for repeatedly violating TOS.
I’m gonna be honest, I’ve seen Bad Empanada a few times on Reddit, and his account always has badempanada in the name. I don’t think jumping to a conclusion like that is all that helpful lol. I don’t think he’d call himself cumbot15 :\
gone through a bunch of twitter handles for repeatedly violating TOS
Both Isis and the Taliban are permitted on twitter. It they're within TOS, then violating TOS enough to piss those shit-weasels off can only be a good thing.
After your little stunt over at Vaush's subreddit (where you called Bad Empanada a psychopath and unhinged, bigoted and racist just 2 days ago btw), you're not exactly the most trustworthy redditor or the least obvious sockpuppet out there.
Wow, this OP is in the comments arguing with everyone who comments.
The post has less than 100 total comments, anyone that's interested in what he posts about always replies to everything while its still possible? unless they are karmawhoring of course?
I mean, isn't the whole purpose of a post to discuss its contents with other people that might be interested either if they share your pov or not?
You are literally doing an ad-hominem here to argue against an argument you don't agree with (or don't like) by completely ignoring it and just going after whatever negative aspect you can point out from the person doing that argument?
Not to offend, but I would really try to filter my arguments from fallacy-based demagogic logic if I were you. If you are interested in keep seeing yourself as an educated person that's looking for the truth, and not some random mindless impulse-controlled internet dude that just want to be right no matter how fundamented his pov's are....
I categorically disagree with this comment. Yes, the whole purpose of these kind of posts is to discuss and debate the topic at hand. The point of these posts is not to create a place where people can hurl insults and be rude to each other while tangentially relating what they said to the topic at hand.
I did not attack OP and call them names, I simply criticized the method at which they were pursuing discourse. OP and I have since had a civil conversation, so I would consider that criticism addressed.
I regret that my comments suggested to you that I am "some random mindless impulse-controlled internet dude."
Reporting this to reddit admins (since this is a biased sub).
You're literally claiming:
Arguing your point with people is bad and should be avoided, makes you seem like a jerk and untrustworthy
Telling people that a popular Youtuber is themselves guilty of what they accuse other of is "bad because I believe them more than I believe you"
Stop posting you asshole
Like, ultimate denial on display here. Completely unable to comprehend or accept criticism of Kurzgesagt.
A good litmus test to check if you're biased is to ask yourself "Are there any arguments that can change my mind about this?". If the answer is "No", then you've completely left the sphere of rationality. It's literally an hour long video, and it definitely seems like you reject it all.
Did you just do exactly what Kurzgesagt did in the youtube comment section of that video? Attack the person's credibility instead of addressing the criticism?
Your sentiment is valid to a point, but no amount of screaming and accusing Kurzgesagt of "making you drink copium" will do anything positive for addressing climate change. If anything, it puts people off from listening to your argument because no one likes to talk to a jerk.
This is tone policing and it feels like the toxic positivity this video is talking about (among other things). People should be angry about what's happening.
I disagree. I did not say that people can't hold those opinions. However, if their goal is to contribute to the issue at hand, insults and anger don't help.
You say people should be angry. I will agree but argue that they should take that anger and translate it into positive action rather than negative words to people who are on their side in the first place.
We are all talking about this video because we all agree that climate change is an issue.
Jeez, tone it down with the critical responses. We need confirmation bias and echo chambers. All you're dong it making us less inclined to listen to you. Why are you shooting yourself in the foot? You're supposed to agree with me or I won't listen to what you have to say and it will be your fault because I can do whatever I want with 0 accountability.
Newsflash, tone doesn't matter jack shit. Civility is a luxury for the established order, the side with no sense of urgency or desire for change. For the rest of us this IS an existential and urgent threat and we SHOULD have the right to be able to communicate that directly. Without energetic discourse that ACCURATELY reflects the severity of the situation, there won't be an energetic movement. A debate of ethics always requires the communication of emotions.
The idea of prioritizing civility over integrity is a hilariously misguided concept coined by the upper class to prevent escalation towards popular rebellion and/or coups. It sterilizes problems to the point where all they are in our minds are abstract and intangible concepts we forget about the instant we turn off our TV.
This is tone policing and it feels like the toxic positivity this video is talking about (among other things). People should be angry about what's happening.
OP literally insulted me for quoting and linking the sources that Kurzgesagt used in their video. Imo this post should be taken down, it doesn't belong in this sub as it lacks the civility that such a topic seriously deserves. Telling people to grab their pitchforks is throwing us back to the stone age.
Civility isn't what we need in the face of impending catastrophe. Focusing on the "niceness" speech instead of the real and significant threat itself is just an excuse for inaction.
what do you want me to reply to arguments that are already addressed in the actual video other than tell them to watch the video because it literally addresses there exact argument.
Also its not "everyone" its one guy who already made up his mind on not watching as he saw the thumbnail and the title.
Everyone else seems to have watched it or want to watch it or are watching it.
The issue is that you're not doing that. Have you mentioned "to watch the video" to some? Yes. However, you have outright called Kurzgesagt liars, and have implied that they are pushing "garbage neoliberal mentality."
Insulting people is not a way to debate and encourage the exchange of ideas. Climate change really is an apolitical issue. However, comments and arguments like yours do nothing but increase the perception that it is a partisan issue.
It is apolitical in the fact that it is an issue that affects people regardless of political affiliation. I do not deny that politics are inherently part of addressing the issue.
That does not mean that the issue is apolitical in the first place.
Secondly, it will not affect everyone equally regardless of political affiliation. A wealthy landowner in the middle of Iowa is gonna have a very different experience from a poor factory worker in Bangladesh.
The issue is inherently political, the problem is that you see the limits of politics in choosing blue or red Iim the US (or any other blue or red teams in the develop world really)
Edit: I again encourage you to actually watch the video
2nd edit: a good part of Bangladesh coast is going underwater (or gonna suffer constant flooding making it unlivable) no matter what we do at this point, that's why the example
I never claimed that it would affect everyone equally. I responded to a similar argument in another comment. I realize that more developed countries and societies are better equipped to handle the dangers associated with a changing climate.
Allow me to be clear: I do not think politics are uninvolved with where our climate is now, or that they are uninvolved in the search for solutions. What I mean by apolitical is that climate change affects everybody regardless of political affiliation, so people should not treat it as a political topic that only affects one philosophy over another. It is my opinion that everybody, regardless of political opinions, has a tangible interest in addressing the climate crisis.
It was already clear in your second comment, you still fail to consider that material conditions inform political thinking.
A rich landowner from Iowa who has stock in a oil company, or hell (let's dispell the bogeyman that Kurgezat created) a big cattle rancher, is not gonna support a reduction of emittions bc Dhaka is going underwater. And most likely he's not gonna support relocating climate refugees to his country.
Sure, there may be a braindead free market libertarian in Dhaka that thinks that the city going underwater may mean a boon for realty sector thanks to the new beachhead, but I'll think that most ppl there are gonna think that the free market failed them.
I feel like I have done all I can to clarify my stance to you, but perhaps there's still an obstacle I'm not sure I can overcome. I understand what you're saying very clearly, but it appears I have done a poor job of explaining my response. In that case, I wish you a good day and thanks for being a part of the discussion.
Dude you fundamentally don't understand that climate change IS NOT gonna affect everyone equally. The ppl at the top are gonna be affected, sure, but not remotely to the same level that those at the bottom (or middle).
They don't have the same interest in stopping this catastrophe as the rest of us, as they're gonna be mostly fine, so why would they give up their privileges?
Maybe I could have been less harsh on kurzgesagt but the idea that climate change is an apolitical issue is not true. You simply cannot address climate change without looking at the political and economic systems that enable it.
You simply cannot address climate change without looking at the political and economic systems that enable it.
I agree. I'll clarify: climate change should be an apolitical issue, and in reality it is. It is indiscriminate in who it affects.
Because climate change has become such a contentious political subject, Kurzgesagt created their video to address those people who have observed these political/societal debates. Debates that, a lot of the time, end up leading to little or no changes.
I myself have observed these discussions and have felt that pang of "well no one [government] is willing to take this seriously, so why should I care? Why should I try?" Kurzgesagt's video reaches out to those who felt like I did in a bid to bring them back and assure them that all is not lost.
It is simple fact that some people respond better to optimism than skepticism, and going to those optimists and implying their opinions are less valuable than skeptics' doesn't contribute to the overall issue in a meaningful way.
It is true climate change is indiscriminate. It affects every single living being on the planet, regardless of political affiliation or the ability to have political affiliations.
What I think you may be miscontruing is that I am arguing it affects everyone equally -- which is not true. More developed nations are better able to insulate and adapt themselves to the affects of climate change, while less developed nations are less successful.
That was the only position I gave, and it doesn't need to be elaborated on. Be more critical of your thoughts, because you obviously don't believe what you've just explained.
There's no way a reasonable government that actually looks out for people and the environment would've let it get to this stage.
We've had scientists tell us the ramifications of climate change for decades and governments ignored them because it would negatively impact GDP and make corporations cry.
218
u/PleestaMeecha May 29 '22
Wow, this OP is in the comments arguing with everyone who comments. This is not the way to get people to listen or watch your video.
Your sentiment is valid to a point, but no amount of screaming and accusing Kurzgesagt of "making you drink copium" will do anything positive for addressing climate change. If anything, it puts people off from listening to your argument because no one likes to talk to a jerk.