Awareness
conservatives made a whole smear campaign against her to try and silence her and demoralize her, and she’s only stood up even more for it. Can’t say she’s done nothing if they’re trying so hard to discredit her
deleted by creator
At bare minimum its to show that there are still groups willing to oppose mass polluters in the hopes that at some point someone with power will make the right call and save the planet.
Is it naive? Quite a bit, but sad complacency isn’t helping much either. As many of these groups are quite young many including Greta may also go into actual politics later in life, then these past incidents serve as proof of authenticity, similar to the pic of Bernie Sanders getting carried away.
Think it was very brave of her to stand up and say that, to say she wants the right to life, to not be forced to inherit a dead planet, and that’s a very bold and self aware statement for a teenager to make. It’s one that obviously made a lot of people uncomfortable because it shoves what we’ve all been complacent in in our faces. To have a child tell us to our faces that we’re all responsible for killing the planet (and especially those in charge) and that it’s their lives we’ve ruined - well that takes a lot of guts. (and it needs to be said)
The issue of climate change is routinely one of the most important issues for young people, so perhaps she played a role in that.
The question itself is pretty useless because how could we possibly quantify a single activist’s contribution to a global issue?
That’s simple. We just locate the nearest parallel universe where she doesn’t exist and compare the future series of climate data from our universe to that one.
Interdimensional science is going to revolutionize the fields of sociology and economics.
The nearest PU will crash the game. What you really want is the nearest QPU.
Awareness is oversimplifying it but it’s a necessary first step for any major movement/revolution. What can one hope to achieve if people won’t acknowledge the problem? Greta highlighted the importance of climate change to many people around the world, and I’m sure she’s a role model to many as well. Many more people are plant based/vegan now compared to 5 years ago. Companies are profit driven so every little change from people makes a difference. It’s the power of awareness that can push people to change for their new found beliefs.
We had awareness in the 70’s but we had action then too. We had the clean-air act passed, the clean water act, the EPA created and I’m sure around the same time coutnry’s in the rest of the world also did similar things. Spreading “awareness” today is just self-aggrandizing and benefits no-one but yourself as the figurehead.
Are you implying that she was doing it for the fame? She missed out on school and a lot of normal teenager activities because she prioritised spreading awareness on climate change. Regardless of the reasons why she or anyone is doing it, her impact is undeniable. I think assuming the worst isn’t fair. It’s not like she has been in scandals related to corruption. Many celebrities and politicians are way more full of shit. She is consistently doing what she can for the environment.
To address your other point: Yes, there has been some actions taken in the past. Yes, there has been some awareness on it spread in the past. No one is saying she’s the first one to do so. The point is those actions and bits of awareness wasn’t enough. That’s why we are where we are. That’s why polar caps are melting at record speed. Amazon forest is the smallest it has ever been. (90+% of the space is used for animal farming). That’s why our global climate is hotter and wilder than ever (record high global average temps last month).
If you don’t think these things are an issue then I can see why spreading awareness would feel like a waste of time. However, if that’s the case then I would strongly recommend looking up the effects and potential dangers of the direction we’re headed regarding climate change. Our future generations are fucked.
You are making an assumption that lack of “awareness” is the problem that needs to be solved. Meanwhile icecaps are melting and mass extinction is occurring, we are already aware of it! Multiple European Governments and energy industries are enabling it! But instead of asking why Germany is still building Coal plants, she is staging fake protests where she “gets arrested” for a photo-op.
That’s exactly why there needs to be enough people to vote for the environment focused government party, if any. There’s no downside to raising awareness when there are still people out there who are in denial of climate change. I did not know about the fake protest arrests. Imo, no one can be perfect in the way their convey their message. Convincing the mass is a difficult thing to do. People will have various opinions on what’s the right way to protest/spread the message. The important thing is that effort is spent, and it’s having an impact. Lastly, we don’t need to focus on one issue at a time as a society. Different groups of people can be responsible for different tasks.
I think I’ve beaten this horse enough. So I’ll just say that while you and I are certainly both environmentalists, I disagree that people like Greta doing what she has been doing, is very useful since it takes a fatal systematic problem and individualizes it for, imo, dubious reasons.
Yeah as much as I hate to use this term, I think a small committee is better suited to handle a complex topic than the entirety of society.
That’s not to say I think committees are great ways of handling things, but that I think a small committee is better at handling things than a large committee.
IMO the only workable solutions to global problems are going to be ones only a few people understand. And not from lack of access to the information, but from lack of time to educate everyone on every problem.
Why is Germany building more coal plants?
My sources tell me it’s because of anti-nuclear sentiment, (and also because of sudden lack of access to Russian gas), but I’ve got source bias and my sources haven’t done an in-depth analysis it’s always mentioned offhand in some bigger message context.
I don’t know. I assume because they needed to make up the gap from shutting down their nuclear plants and coal is cheap and pretty fast to get going, plus doesn’t require any “exotic” manufacturing like solar/wind need. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts
I mostly agree with your point, but I’m not sure if “awareness” is the right term here. She is helping to spread commitment. She’s more like a coach than she is like a reporter. She helps people who already know about climate change decide to take responsibility for it and do something about it.
For a kid? Yes
This site quickly turned into reddit-style bandwagoning and downvoting stuff you disagree with, huh
deleted by creator
We’re way beyond saving by planting trees. We’re way beyond saving by picking up trash on the streets. This is a worldwide systemic issue that can NOT be solved by individuals reducing their carbon footprint, we as a species need a negative carbon footprint to survive this century, or even these next few decades, or even these next few years. We have a transport problem, we have a factories problem, we have an affluence problem, a conglomerates problem, we have a capitalism problem, we have a “progress” problem.
It’s ridiculous to get angry at a child that sees all this and cries out in desperation, most of us will die before she and her generation does, and they’re going to be left with a mess beyond repair. And it’s not because Timmy ate a burger or because Anne didn’t pick up trash in a park, nor is it because Bob commutes using a car, it’s because our economic system demands “progress” at all cost right this moment. It’s because our cities around the world prioritize cars and cheap individualistic transportation. It’s because prices need to be stable, so let’s throw products away to create a limit on supply. It’s because it’s more profitable to implement planned obsolescence than it is to implement renewability and durability into products. This is clearly not something that can be solved by a single person, whether that person is an everyday anon who does his or her best to reduce their carbon footpront, or whether that is a kid addressing the world leaders while in distress about her future life in this world. The change that needs to happen is revolution, and the world is too complacent and too scared of taking such actions to save itself, and I can’t really blame people for it, even if we should.
deleted by creator
You know who has? The anonymous kid who plants trees.
No. They haven’t had a measurable impact. Especially if they’re the kind of kid who drives a car somewhere to go plant those trees and then drives back.
The kid who pics up garbage left on the road.
Making it so that people don’t see the garbage building up, and feel OK about just tossing their stuff out their car windows.
I think I see your point, awareness alone might be just as you asked, but for some she also gave the courage to act on that awareness, to commit themselves to take steps towards progress and away from practices that harm an entire planet while benefiting very few, by supporting public policies focusing on such and raising more awareness. I’ve certainly benefited from having a personal vehicle and modern industry but those that profit immensely from them should be held responsible with proper regulation and responsibility to cleaning up messes and compensating the lives and environments ruined as a result. Too many weak and corrupt individuals have again and again taken the attractive “deal with the devil” to look the other way in order to secure something they desire. We are all capable of corruption and we are all capable of integrity. I have hope for the future because of people inspiring me like, civil rights leaders; MLK and Bernie Sanders, abolitionists; Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass, and finally who I see as everyday people like; Greta Thunberg and Daryl Davis.
It’s probably her affectiveness. If she wasn’t getting attention, they wouldn’t bother to oppose her.
She’s gotten the issue of climate change to be a major issue with young voters
It’s really not her fault that the people in power have a vested interest in ignoring climate change.
Also she got Andrew Tate arrested so there’s that.
How to you figure the people in power have a vested interest in ignoring climate change? Seems like everyone has a vested interest in acknowledging any risk to our civilization.
Because they get a lot of money from fossil fuel companies.
And the others are just ignoring climate change to “own the libs”.
Not if they believe it won’t affect them, and if they can turn their power into connections with rich people willing to part with their wealth in exchange for the promise their civilisational-risk-increasing industries can press on unabated.
They haven’t shown much interest in practice.
Actions, not words.
Speaking from a German perspective I feel like the Fridays for future movement has significantly affected (parts of) her generation. I have many colleagues whose kids are focusing on a diet with less environmental impact and also asking their parents to change.
It is impressive that it has been such a long running and wide spreading movement and I am sure that there will be many politicians, activists and entrepreneurs coming out of this movement in the future.
It is hard to expect anything more from a child who has been belittled constantly. I wish I would be standing up for my believes as strongly as she does.
Thunberg’s style is her best asset. She keeps making a simple point, without trying to complexify it. When people try to complexify it, she brings them back to the simple point:
- this is a major problem
- it will lead to death and destruction if not addressed
- we have a tendency to ignore it that needs to be counteracted
She uses the simplest possible language and stays on point. Which for some odd reason nobody else seems to be capable of.
Some will say she’s just a “cheerleader” but that’s kind of what we need if we’re going to address this. Political will is the constraining factor in our climate change response.
If your parents were multimillionaires and hired publicists and boat crews and built a brand around those beliefs, I’m sure you would have too.
A lot of rich kids just become spoiled and rich. What Greta did was special.
Both can be true.
Yeah, I would have but I’m not rich or have the time so I couldn’t. Good thing she’s doing it.
Meanwhile I’m not rich, but I haven’t commuted by car in almost 15 years. I also haven’t flown a sailing crew to New York to sail a boat built by a Rothschild back across the Atlantic ocean after I finished my instagram post. So I’d say I’ve done less damage to the environment then she has.
deleted by creator
Agreed. Collective action is the only solution but becoming a figurehead so that you can fly around the world going to climate conferences and taking selfies is unhelpful.
But tell me what movement did you help to gain traction? Or who listens to what you have to say?
Ah good point. I should have been born to millionaire parents who hired a publicist for me that would tell everyone I was going to take a gap year when I was 16 and fly around the world going to climate conferences. You win this one, congrats.
So everything someone says because they’re wealthier than you is invalid or what? Just stfu.
Hey, wonderful! This guy over here has done less gamage to the environment than a child climate activist with money! He has single handedly averted the climate apocalypse in doing so!
See, it isn’t a fucking competition about who’s fucking the world less, it’s about all of us not fucking the world up to extinction. We don’t get there by being good little green boys while nothing is done about the affluent, the powerful, and the conglomerates. And guess what, nobody is doing anything about them, and I’m not about to get angry at a child for desperately calling that out even if she can’t do anything else about it.
The affluent, powerful and conglomerates all support her, yet there has been negative action on climate change, I wonder why that is?
IMO her argument is that we need to rework the system, providing more people with better access to public transport so everyone can reduce their damage without needing to sacrifice their day to day function, so it’s really irrelevant whether our damage is more or less in comparison to hers.
So you’re just envious that nobody is applauding for you?
Yep. People that criticize charlatans are just jealous, you figured it out.
I think if my parents were multimillionaires I would be even more busy enjoying my life than fighting a fight with uneven odds.
Of course coming from a stable background makes it easier to be an activist, but it is still far from easy to devote your life to one cause.
She’s caused every conservative to despise a teenager so much that they send her death threats. Seeing tiny brains be threatened by a young girl is pretty impressive IMO.
“Clean water? Cheap power from solar? No thanks, environmental activists.” - tiny 🧠
“What if climate change is a lie and we accidentally make the world a better place for nothing?”
We’ll just have to suffer through the clean air and stable climate until we can build up enough smog and CO2 to get things back to how they are currently, hopefully worse.
What she (and other climate activists) have done and do is spread awareness about this issue. As you can imagine, it’s important to keep important topics (arguably even the most important topic humanity faces, yes even more important than soccer (lol)) present in media and in people’s heads for them to not be forgotten soon after again. People need to be constantly reminded that our current way of life currently destroys our planet, especially considering that not much happened to steer against this problem within the last couple of years after the Paris agreement. And we don’t even know many of the tipping points that could accelerate disaster even further. When some ecosystems stop existing and food chains become disrupted, for example.
In a way, she’s like a PR person for the most important topic in science currently. And she (and other climate actrivists) is successful at it, considering it’s so often in the news and so many of the polluters hate her and try to discredit her and others.
Always remember though: it’s about the problem, not specific people. Of course we like talking about people, and the media does it as well, but as the saying goes, “small minds discuss people, great minds discuss ideas”. It’s about the problem at hand, irrelevant of Greta or other activists. She’s just trying to bring the point across to a mass audience, that’s all. We (as in: the whole humanity, no exceptions) need to take action against the problem, not talk about Greta. This “ad hominem” strategy is sometimes deliberately used as a distraction away from the issue at hand. When articles talk about Greta or try to discredit her or whatever, then the debate is shifted away from the actual problem at hand. Even articles about her in a positive light are, in the end, irrelevant. It’s not about her, or other climate activists. She even says that herself. If the activists didn’t exist, we’d still face the exact same problem.
OK now ask what word leaders and companies that hold power have actually achieved so far in the same period.
Five years later this is a relevant question. So her awareness campaign is at least as effective as Susan G. Komen.
You need to think more long term, next generation level. Because of her and others, kids will be born and raised with the mindset that the planet needs saving.
Hopefully Greta’s legacy is more then just a non-profit that steals from desperate cancer patients but given the genesis of her brand, I doubt it.
What have you achieved in try e past 5 years?
It’s been five whole years and this teenager hasn’t defeated all of global capitalism, what’s she even doing?
Main things is that Gen Z is ashamed of travelling by plane
They do it anyway though.
A full plane is still greener than a car with 1-2 passengers.
I was thinking about doing the math awhile ago, because a full A320 Neon only uses 1,5l per passenger for 100 km. They just don’t burn the same fuel and at different altitudes.
A full plane is still greener than a car with 1-2 passengers.
That may be true if you’re going the same distance, but planes go a lot farther. A lot of plane trips are unnecessary, and wouldn’t be made at all if the plane wasn’t an option. Many car trips are also unnecessary, but given modern infrastructure, they tend to be more necessary than plane trips.
Per kg-km flying is higher carbon impact than driving, no matter how full the plane is.
It just isn’t. A car would need at least 2 passengers to beat a plane, maybe 3-4 depending on the car. Jet engines are incredibly efficient and planes carry a lot of people. If they all hopped in cars, the planet would turn into a smog hellscape.
If you care about personal emissions so much, take a train.
Sorry - I don’t expect you to change your own habits or something, this isn’t personal. I work in this space, so to me it’s just a fact and not a matter of opinion. Air travel results in higher carbon emissions per kg-km than road travel by about an order of magnitude. Even for long haul flights.
The GREET model: https://www.energy.gov/eere/bioenergy/articles/greet-greenhouse-gases-regulated-emissions-and-energy-use-transportation
What did you achieve since 2018?
She opened my eyes to something that should have been obvious.
Eternal economic growth is a fairy tale that’s killing us.
There’s been a bunch of decent memes.
