Hacker News Reader

Sounds like the reasoning of a terrorist. Seriously.

If your primary goal is to force people to do something they don't want to do, on principle, call yourself an activist, a freedom-fighter, or a terrorist, I don't care. It's all the same to me.

If your primary goal is the survival of the human race, you shouldn't moralize.

View on HN

You're the only one talking about morals here, I'm just stating facts. We have seen over 30 years of inaction since the inception of the IPCC, yet activists are the problem?

That's a clever way to inject your agenda, but I'm not having it. The immediate problem is ecological collapse, the proposed solution is a Sun-shade, and you're basically shouting that "we'll do nothing until we get to the bottom of the failures of Capitalism!"

Enough. This isn't a Parliament and you don't get a liberum veto.

>If your primary goal is the survival of the human race, you shouldn't moralize.

Could you expound on that a bit? The assertion alone doesn't parse.

Moralizing about the imperfect behavior of people during a crisis is essentially bikeshedding.

It makes me wonder about the people doing the moralizing: do they really care to contribute to the solution, or are they grinding their own personal axe about the behavior of others?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com