Thread

1. TazeTSchnitzel · 1790689639 · focus · HN ↗

   I guess that demonstrates the concept of “a drop in the ocean”, but turning a massacre of civilians into a unit of energy feels crass at best.

   1. scarecrowbob · 1790695627 · focus · HN ↗

      I understand that the party line in the US is that the quality of life engendered by the ecocide of the earth makes up for the mass death that anthropogeenic climate change entails.

      At the same time, I have a hard time thinking that the destruction of the environment is either necessary or natural. So the death caused by climate change also seems like a particular kind of massacre.

      Where I was raised, it was a commonplace to think of the firebombings and nuclear incineration of vast amounts of civilian populations as regrettable but necessary and perhaps even a natural outcome of technological growth.

      I hadn't really considered that position until your comment, but my rejoinder would be "perhaps the comparison is unfortunately apt and it is crass to ignore the death caused by climate change."

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.