Climate Activists had this underlying assumption that part of our problem was that there was too much disconnect between action and consequence. We thought it was because people couldn't immediately see #ClimateCrisis or its effect was the main problem.
COVID proved that wrong. Literally friends, family, and neighbours were dying and in order to preserve whatever stupid ideology they wanted to preserve, people started suing coroners to take COVID off of their loved ones' death certificates.
We thought if we could show people evidence, they'll accept it and move on. Now we know that evidence is irrelevant. This is the fight of our lives. We are beyond asking nicely. If they are intent on killing us, we must take action to preserve our lives.
@chu Evidence doesn't win an argument which is fundamentally about personal values.
COVID and climate disagreements can largely be distilled down to society Vs the individual. At one extreme society's needs always trump the individual's. At the other extreme the individual's needs always trump society's. Everyone is at their own unique point along that spectrum.
Because your values are at a certain point on that spectrum, the conclusion about what to do is obvious given the evidence. Somebody else will balance the societal cost Vs individual cost differently to you. You might see them as selfish, and they'll see you as authoritarian.
To argue effectively, you have to understand what your opponent values and why, then state why their values are impacted. There's no use winning the argument with yourself.
