It strikes me as a special kind of silly when the anticapitalist urges of the new left come into direct conflict with the rabid environmentalism of same.
Volkswagen and BMW and Mercedes-Benz are happy to continue selling ICE cars and they are not protesting them, yet these same activists will chastise you in Berlin for eating a cheeseburger, citing the environmental impact.
This is religion, not a coherent argument. Tesla is the reason vehicles are being electrified on a mass scale; nobody wanted EVs before they paved the way.
Every Tesla that is sold is one fewer ICE blasting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
It’s sad to see people being angry for the sake of being angry.
> “This region is one of the driest in all of Germany, and climate change is worsening the consequences year by year,” she says. “There’s little rain, and while there are many lakes, they are surface waters, not aquifers or underground reserves. People here have always been taught not to water lawns or flower beds in the summer to save water. Yet, the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, can extract 1.8 million cubic meters (63.5 cubic feet) of water a year and pollute the groundwater in a protected area. To me, it’s incomprehensible.”
> Hoyer and the citizens’ initiative have held protests and gone door to door, distributing flyers to raise awareness about the issue. In a non-binding local referendum held in February, 65 percent of residents of the nearby town of Grunheide said they opposed Tesla's expansion plans.
What are Tesla's plans to make sure the residents of Grunheide won't be hurting for water?
Yeah, it's perfectly reasonable to protest against the local consequences of a company that's doing good on a global scale. Even Tesla can be held accountable for its impact - it's a business after all.
I can only assume similar protests happen against other companies as well, but this makes better headlines due to misconceptions similar to GPs.
But Tesla's PR is absolutely working here - they've convinced you to zoom in on one thing and ignore all the intertwined issues. The silly climate protestors are protesting the thing that (Tesla's PR department has convinced you) will save the environment.
> This is religion, not a coherent argument. Tesla is the reason vehicles are being electrified on a mass scale; nobody wanted EVs before they paved the way.
Capitalism is a religion. The worship of profit above all else.
Wanting human rights for the lithium and cobalt miners (and opposing the environmental destruction that results from that mining) is incoherent.
It's incoherent to want access to clean and safe drinking water and oppose over extraction.
Opposing the destruction of forests is incoherent.
A "green" company destroying the environment for profit? Now, that's what I call coherent.
This isn’t just limited to environmentalism, it’s everywhere. Trump voters for instance a week after the election thought the economy was doing substantially better. Not forward looking, the current economy.
It strikes me as a special kind of silly when the anticapitalist urges of the new left come into direct conflict with the rabid environmentalism of same.
Volkswagen and BMW and Mercedes-Benz are happy to continue selling ICE cars and they are not protesting them, yet these same activists will chastise you in Berlin for eating a cheeseburger, citing the environmental impact.
This is religion, not a coherent argument. Tesla is the reason vehicles are being electrified on a mass scale; nobody wanted EVs before they paved the way.
Every Tesla that is sold is one fewer ICE blasting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
It’s sad to see people being angry for the sake of being angry.
> “This region is one of the driest in all of Germany, and climate change is worsening the consequences year by year,” she says. “There’s little rain, and while there are many lakes, they are surface waters, not aquifers or underground reserves. People here have always been taught not to water lawns or flower beds in the summer to save water. Yet, the richest man in the world, Elon Musk, can extract 1.8 million cubic meters (63.5 cubic feet) of water a year and pollute the groundwater in a protected area. To me, it’s incomprehensible.”
> Hoyer and the citizens’ initiative have held protests and gone door to door, distributing flyers to raise awareness about the issue. In a non-binding local referendum held in February, 65 percent of residents of the nearby town of Grunheide said they opposed Tesla's expansion plans.
What are Tesla's plans to make sure the residents of Grunheide won't be hurting for water?
Yeah, it's perfectly reasonable to protest against the local consequences of a company that's doing good on a global scale. Even Tesla can be held accountable for its impact - it's a business after all.
I can only assume similar protests happen against other companies as well, but this makes better headlines due to misconceptions similar to GPs.
> Volkswagen and BMW and Mercedes-Benz are happy to continue selling ICE cars and they are not protesting them
They don't? Or are you just unaware that they do?
https://www.thecanary.co/global/2023/10/25/munich-judge-conv...
https://media.greenpeace.org/CS.aspx?VP3=DamView&VBID=27MZV8...
https://media.greenpeace.org/archive/Activists-Report-Merced...
https://jungefreiheit.de/politik/deutschland/2023/zuendeln-f...
https://www.dw.com/en/activists-throw-cake-amid-protest-at-v...
But Tesla's PR is absolutely working here - they've convinced you to zoom in on one thing and ignore all the intertwined issues. The silly climate protestors are protesting the thing that (Tesla's PR department has convinced you) will save the environment.
> This is religion, not a coherent argument. Tesla is the reason vehicles are being electrified on a mass scale; nobody wanted EVs before they paved the way.
Capitalism is a religion. The worship of profit above all else.
Wanting human rights for the lithium and cobalt miners (and opposing the environmental destruction that results from that mining) is incoherent.
It's incoherent to want access to clean and safe drinking water and oppose over extraction.
Opposing the destruction of forests is incoherent.
A "green" company destroying the environment for profit? Now, that's what I call coherent.
This isn’t just limited to environmentalism, it’s everywhere. Trump voters for instance a week after the election thought the economy was doing substantially better. Not forward looking, the current economy.
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/13/consumer-sentiment-republic...