Time Person of the Year 2019

[Airbeck]

Ok dude. You have your views. I get it. You are entitled to feel however you want about her. It just seems very weird to me to be so overboard with your expectations of what a 16 year old is capable of, and to view her in such a negative light when she’s motivated in trying to help however she can to make sure our planet can continue to support us living here. Turning that motivation into something negative is very odd and very telling. I really think there isn’t anything she could have done or said, or any message she could have put forth that you would not feel this way about, because the fact is you just don’t want to do anything to address the issue. That’s fine, you can be against trying to solve the problem, but that view is really coloring your perspective of her and causing you to view a 16 year old in a really bizarre way with expectations that no person could ever live up to. But hey, you do you man.

[XT]

@Airbeck

Ok dude. You have your views. I get it. You are entitled to feel however you want about her. It just seems very weird to me to be so overboard with your expectations of what a 16 year old is capable of, and to view her in such a negative light when she’s motivated in trying to help however she can to make sure our planet can continue to support us living here. Turning that motivation into something negative is very odd and very telling. I really think there isn’t anything she could have done or said, or any message she could have put forth that you would not feel this way about, because the fact is you just don’t want to do anything to address the issue. That’s fine, you can be against trying to solve the problem, but that view is really coloring your perspective of her and causing you to view a 16 year old in a really bizarre way with expectations that no person could ever live up to. But hey, you do you man.

You do the same. If you want to think of her as the person of the year and that Time is justified, I’m fine with that. I don’t think she is a horrible person, I don’t think she is even necessarily wrong in her wanting to get people’s attention about climate change. I think that’s a valid thing to draw the public’s attention too as it IS a major issue. I think we are doing more (especially if by ‘we’ you mean in Europe or many other countries) than she is giving credit for, and I think her focus is skewed by her politics, but that’s just my personal feelings. In short, I think there are others who are more deserving of such a title, but I agree it’s all opinion and viewpoint.

You do you man. As I always say, MMV…

[Airbeck]

@XT

You do the same. If you want to think of her as the person of the year and that Time is justified, I’m fine with that. I don’t think she is a horrible person, I don’t think she is even necessarily wrong in her wanting to get people’s attention about climate change. I think that’s a valid thing to draw the public’s attention too as it IS a major issue. I think we are doing more (especially if by ‘we’ you mean in Europe or many other countries) than she is giving credit for, and I think her focus is skewed by her politics, but that’s just my personal feelings.

You do you man. As I always say, MMV…

Yes her focus is skewed by her politics. But yours is definitely not?

Cool:rolleyes:

And I really don’t give a damn who Time chooses as person of the year. I just find it bizarre how much some people are overreacting angrily to this. Seriously weird.

[XT]

So much for me doing me, ehe? But yeah, I’m not sure why that needs to be said…of COURSE my viewpoint is skewed by my own weird brand of politics and world view. As is your’s. Should I have mentioned that, or is it so boneheadly obvious that, really, it doesn’t need to be? You decide…

I’m not angry at her…I’m angry at being attacked for pointing out my issues with her. And it’s not seriously weird…it’s a 'nother fucking day on this board. We call that ‘Monday’…

[GIGObuster]

@XT

(they are…though I’m unsure how racism or patriarchal systems cause global warming),

You did notice that I complained to the other poster for not realizing even many conservatives nowadays claim to be opposed to those things too, and that was enough for that.

However, I have to point out that several environmentalists already noted how racism and lack of concern for poor people that **still **takes place in the USA, is also seen in how a lot of powerful interests and leadership in the USA make moves that end up pandering to racists and bigots because a lot of the effects of the contamination and resulting global warming will affect not only poor and minorities harder in the US but also other countries with a lot of black, brown and poor people.

It doesn’t surprise me that the environmental justice movement began in the south, a place where, historically, the pressure of injustice builds until it explodes into organized resistance.

The Warren, North Carolina, protests of 1982 are considered one of the earliest examples of the environmental justice movement. A manufacturer of electrical transformers dumped tons of cancer-causing PCB waste along 240 miles of North Carolina’s highways. When it came time for the clean up, the North Carolina government chose Warren – a small, predominantly African American town – for the toxic waste facility.

There were weeks of protests and over 500 arrests. It was an awakening, showing the country that race and class play a part in who has to live near toxic waste.

“Advocacy is essential,” Middleton continued, ”but you cannot succeed at environmental protection without lawyers, especially when you’re up against political power and resources.”

I asked what it was like working against conservative ideology in the south.

“It wasn’t always that way,” Middleton explained. “When we first started, people wanted clean air. The environment wasn’t politicized. We had public opinion behind us.”

In the late 70s and early 80s, Middleton told me, companies weren’t savvy about environmental laws, and winning cases was easier. Eventually, companies began to staff their own environmental lawyers, and then came the Reagan administration, which strengthened the conservative ideology that still persists in the south today: that government is the enemy, and regulation prevents prosperity.

Environmental advocates, like those at SELC, are working across a divided nation. “I had no idea it would become as partisan as it is today. It has gotten so bad,” Middleton says. “People will tell me, ‘You’re not so bad for an environmentalist.’ Tell me - how did the idea of caring about the environment become leftwing political ideology?”

We both acknowledge that climate change is going to make things worse. “It’s a slow, insidious process,” he says. “America is a crisis society – we don’t pay attention to anything until there’s a real crisis.”

If companies are not held responsible for the pollution they cause, and the government does not act to protect all citizens, we may have several crises to choose from.

[Airbeck]

@XT

So much for me doing me, ehe? But yeah, I’m not sure why that needs to be said…of COURSE my viewpoint is skewed by my own weird brand of politics and world view. As is your’s. Should I have mentioned that, or is it so boneheadly obvious that, really, it doesn’t need to be? You decide…

Right back atcha.

So you admit that your views of her are colored by your politics, but you think using that accusation against her is somehow a criticism that only discredits her? Strange. Don’t you see that same logic would discredit everything you say also?

Yes everyone has political opinions, but what I can’t understand is how that fact only discredits those that disagree with you and not everyone with any opinion at all.

[GIGObuster]

@XT

You are so funny. Because you seem to get all your talking points from others you seem to assume I do as well. As I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t give a flying fuck what Trump et al say. If they are saying similar things to me then that’s coincidence. I think…I think…that what she says has a left leaning feel to it.

Remember what many of the ones supporting Trump say about the feelings of others…

But again, what you are relying is about feelings, not information. The fact that China does not see Thumberg as an ally is enough for me to realize that no, China was not excluded and they know it. Thumberg’s message, and the one from many other environmentalists and proponents of change, is that all nations need to do better.

[GIGObuster]

Missed the source for the quotes on post #85:

'They chose us because we were rural and poor': when environmental racism and...

**

‘They chose us because we were rural and poor’: when environmental racism and climate change collide

**

[XT]

@Airbeck

Right back atcha.

So you admit that your views of her are colored by your politics, but you think using that accusation against her is somehow a criticism that only discredits her? Strange. Don’t you see that same logic would discredit everything you say also?

Yes everyone has political opinions, but what I can’t understand is how that fact only discredits those that disagree with you and not everyone with any opinion at all.

Of course my views on everything are colored by my politics and world view. I’m not trying to discredit her, or attack her either…I was explaining why I fucking don’t think she is person of the year material. IMHO. Get it? Why is that so hard? Well, it’s so hard for you because you see criticism and someone not in lockstep as an attack, an attempt to discredit and just incomprehensible.

I don’t know that if she had said the things I wanted to hear on this subject (talk about ALL the bad actors, talk about various solutions like nuclear and energy storage for renewable energy system, etc) I STILL would have picked her as my person of the year, frankly. To me, the folks in Hong Kong are putting it on the line and at serious risk in the face of increasingly harsh measures and with the CCP sword of Damocles over their collective heads, so I think THAT is much more a person of the year thingy than Greta. As I said, YMMV. I didn’t attack anyone in this thread for holding that view…just received attacks for my own reason for not doing so. Interesting how that works, no?

[wolfpup]

@RickJay

I agree, though, that she almost certainly won’t, and there is a grossness to a kid with significant psychological problems being thrust into the spotlight, and now Time is part of that.

I’m sure that this is just an uninitentionally poor choice of words on your part, but it echoes Fox News conservative commentator Michael Knowles calling the 16-year-old activist “mentally ill” back in September. The reality is that kids (and adults) with Asperger’s are often much brighter than the average population, more focused, passionate, determined, exacting, and frequently more successful in their chosen careers. To call this a “mental illness” is pure medical ignorance. To call it a “significant psychological problem” is neither more charitable nor more realistic.

@AlsoNamedBort

School Strike for Climate - Wikipedia

Yeah, that’s a pretty strange definition of “having no impact”. Climate change has been described as the biggest problem and the most daunting challenge in human history. Progress is going to be slow and incremental and an an essential part of it is growing public awareness.

[Airbeck]

@XT

Of course my views on everything are colored by my politics and world view. I’m not trying to discredit her, or attack her either…I was explaining why I fucking don’t think she is person of the year material. IMHO. Get it? Why is that so hard? Well, it’s so hard for you because you see criticism and someone not in lockstep as an attack, an attempt to discredit and just incomprehensible.

I don’t know that if she had said the things I wanted to hear on this subject (talk about ALL the bad actors, talk about various solutions like nuclear and energy storage for renewable energy system, etc) I STILL would have picked her as my person of the year, frankly. To me, the folks in Hong Kong are putting it on the line and at serious risk in the face of increasingly harsh measures and with the CCP sword of Damocles over their collective heads, so I think THAT is much more a person of the year thingy than Greta. As I said, YMMV. I didn’t attack anyone in this thread for holding that view…just received attacks for my own reason for not doing so. Interesting how that works, no?

I get that you don’t “fucking” think she deserves it. I just don’t know why you are so angry about it. Seems unhinged to be this upset about a pointless magazine honor that means nothing.

Do you think if the Hong Kong protesters would have been chosen that it would have changed one thing with their circumstances? Its fluff, and you are losing your shit over it. That’s what I don’t get.

[Banquet_Bear]

@XT

Those things are bad. Know what else is bad? Authoritarian states that pollute without ANY sort of check on them. Wonder why she didn’t mention that (or other bad things that lead, more than these, to rampant global warming…that IS the problem we are trying to fix here, right, not social engineering of specific perceived problems in the West??)? Well, notice that she didn’t include communist authoritarian states, or other states that have pushed it to it’s limits? IOW, she focused almost solely, again, on the West…Europe and the US. YOU might not have noticed how her message is crafted to a certain viewpoint, but then seemingly a lot of folks haven’t either as they seem genuinely perplexed how anyone could see it that way.

You are focused on how those things are, rightfully, bad (they are…though I’m unsure how racism or patriarchal systems cause global warming), while not seeing the fact that her list is suspiciously crafted to have a suspiciously narrow target(s)…

…

You are so funny. Because you seem to get all your talking points from others you seem to assume I do as well. As I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t give a flying fuck what Trump et al say. If they are saying similar things to me then that’s coincidence. I think…I think…that what she says has a left leaning feel to it. I see her focus on the West as part of this. I see her lack of focus on, oh, say China as indicative of it as well. The fact that the Chinese aren’t happy with her message is beside the point…the fact that she didn’t say it IS the point. Had she gone after China and others in her speeches I’d have been more sympathetic. She chose not too…and crafted her message TOO focus on what she focused on and not on what she didn’t.

As for Airbeck’s assertion that she focused on non-authoritarian citizens because they can be reached or whatever I call bullshit. If she is REALLY trying to cause a global change she should have gone after the largest offenders, not on just who she thought she could both shape AND who she perceived as having input into their governments. You both think I’m seeing things she isn’t saying or doesn’t mean that way, and I think you are blinding yourselves to how her message is crafted. To me, she is being deliberately manipulative and focused on specific countries and specific people who she wants to blame AND make feel guilty in order to have folks do the vaguely defined stuff she hasn’t really given the details on…just rebel against authority and the system and do something good.

…

Of course my views on everything are colored by my politics and world view. I’m not trying to discredit her, or attack her either…I was explaining why I fucking don’t think she is person of the year material. IMHO. Get it? Why is that so hard? Well, it’s so hard for you because you see criticism and someone not in lockstep as an attack, an attempt to discredit and just incomprehensible.

I don’t know that if she had said the things I wanted to hear on this subject (talk about ALL the bad actors, talk about various solutions like nuclear and energy storage for renewable energy system, etc) I STILL would have picked her as my person of the year, frankly. To me, the folks in Hong Kong are putting it on the line and at serious risk in the face of increasingly harsh measures and with the CCP sword of Damocles over their collective heads, so I think THAT is much more a person of the year thingy than Greta. As I said, YMMV. I didn’t attack anyone in this thread for holding that view…just received attacks for my own reason for not doing so. Interesting how that works, no?

…if we didn’t have the additional context of the name of this thread I would have had no idea you were talking about** the actions of a 16 year old girl and not the actions of a nation state.** Can you be very specific for a moment and share with us "what is so “suspicious” about her “narrowly crafted list?” Why do you think that “a lot of folks hadn’t noticed?” We all get that you don’t think she should have won: but this rant goes so far beyond simply expressing that simple sentiment it almost sounds like a conspiracy theory.

[Czarcasm]

@Banquet_Bear

…if we didn’t have the additional context of the name of this thread I would have had no idea you were talking about** the actions of a 16 year old girl and not the actions of a nation state.** Can you be very specific for a moment and share with us "what is so “suspicious” about her “narrowly crafted list?” Why do you think that “a lot of folks hadn’t noticed?” We all get that you don’t think she should have won: but this rant goes so far beyond simply expressing that simple sentiment it almost sounds like a conspiracy theory.

Agreed, and I would add this question: Who do you think should have won?

[sps49sd]

@Banquet_Bear

…if we didn’t have the additional context of the name of this thread I would have had no idea you were talking about** the actions of a 16 year old girl and not the actions of a nation state.** Can you be very specific for a moment and share with us "what is so “suspicious” about her “narrowly crafted list?” Why do you think that “a lot of folks hadn’t noticed?” We all get that you don’t think she should have won: but this rant goes so far beyond simply expressing that simple sentiment it almost sounds like a conspiracy theory.

Because XT is trying to answer specifics brought up by other posters.

@Czarcasm

Agreed, and I would add this question: Who do you think should have won?

Post 51.

[Skywatcher]

You wanted a forum post to win Person of the Year?

[Slash1972]

How about just the number “51”? It already had an area, and now apparently has a great post on the Straight Dope Message Board.

[XT]

@Banquet_Bear

…if we didn’t have the additional context of the name of this thread I would have had no idea you were talking about** the actions of a 16 year old girl and not the actions of a nation state.** Can you be very specific for a moment and share with us "what is so “suspicious” about her “narrowly crafted list?” Why do you think that “a lot of folks hadn’t noticed?” We all get that you don’t think she should have won: but this rant goes so far beyond simply expressing that simple sentiment it almost sounds like a conspiracy theory.

I’m unsure how you would think I was talking about a nation state, so it’s hard for me to answer this. I already DID say what I didn’t like about her crafted narrative, so, again, not sure how to answer this that is different than I already have. I get that many of you don’t see the left leaning nature of her narrative. It’s fairly unsurprising to be honest. As to the heat, again (for, I don’t know, the 3rd time) it’s not directed at her…let me be very clear. It’s directed and fucking posts like this and the others I’ve had to deal with that I’m getting very, very tired of. IOW, it’s directed at you. At Czarcasm for asking yet another stupid question the answer to which I’ve given something like 4 times IN THIS FUCKING THREAD ALONE. At Airbeck who is taking my heat at these silly games to be all about Greta and can’t, for the life of him figure out why I’m so hot about it. At stupid shit like your last CT jab because I have a different view point.

Fuck it. Figure it out. Or don’t. I think I’m done with these silly, stupid fucking games.

[Shodan]

@Airbeck

Do you think if the Hong Kong protesters would have been chosen that it would have changed one thing with their circumstances? Its fluff, and you are losing your shit over it. That’s what I don’t get.

Correct. Picking her for Person of the Year is a cheap way of doing something about climate change that doesn’t actually do anything about climate change.

Because actually doing something about climate change is hard. The Greens won’t hear of nuclear, the Chinese aren’t going to throttle back their economy, and wind and solar won’t scale up. Better to pat Ms. Thunberg on the head and say “isn’t she brave”.

Regards,
Shodan

[XT]

@Shodan

Correct. Picking her for Person of the Year is a cheap way of doing something about climate change that doesn’t actually do anything about climate change.

Because actually doing something about climate change is hard. The Greens won’t hear of nuclear, the Chinese aren’t going to throttle back their economy, and wind and solar won’t scale up. Better to pat Ms. Thunberg on the head and say “isn’t she brave”.

Regards,
Shodan

Exactly. And worse…Time did this, IMHO, because if they had made the Hong Kong protesters collectively person of the year, it would have pissed off China. Can’t have that. Ask the NBA how that works out. Or other companies. So, it was a twofer…they could not piss off the Chinese (except, their reception of Greta hasn’t exactly been heart warming anyway) AND endear themselves to the left. Win/Win (with Chinese characteristics).

Maybe it would have been their choice anyway, but the cynical part of me says…yeah, but…

[Airbeck]

@XT

I’m unsure how you would think I was talking about a nation state, so it’s hard for me to answer this. I already DID say what I didn’t like about her crafted narrative, so, again, not sure how to answer this that is different than I already have. I get that many of you don’t see the left leaning nature of her narrative. It’s fairly unsurprising to be honest. As to the heat, again (for, I don’t know, the 3rd time) it’s not directed at her…let me be very clear. It’s directed and fucking posts like this and the others I’ve had to deal with that I’m getting very, very tired of. IOW, it’s directed at you. At Czarcasm for asking yet another stupid question the answer to which I’ve given something like 4 times IN THIS FUCKING THREAD ALONE. At Airbeck who is taking my heat at these silly games to be all about Greta and can’t, for the life of him figure out why I’m so hot about it. At stupid shit like your last CT jab because I have a different view point.

Fuck it. Figure it out. Or don’t. I think I’m done with these silly, stupid fucking games.

• “crafted narrative”? Shes a 16 year old, shes not Fox News or George Soros. You keep assigning this disingenuousness to her like she can’t just legitimately feel this way, but rather is being used to push someone else’s agenda that is not her own. What is your basis for taking away her own agency this way? My understanding is that her parents were not on board with her activism in the beginning. Do you just not think 16 year olds are capable of starting a movement like the climate strike on their own?

• Left wing agenda? Again, if “trying to ensure that the planet can continue to support human life” is a left wing agenda, what is the corresponding right wing agenda? I think it is you who is seeing things from a skewed perspective. If the survival of the human species on this planet is left wing, then I guess I’d have to say the left wing is on the right side of this one. The alternative seems pretty bleak.

• You are raving like a madman and cursing about how you are not mad. You do realize how this comes across right? Maybe you should step back for a second if this is affecting you that much. There’s a reason you are so intense right now, and I guess it’s easier to just blame us not agreeing with you then to do a little self reflection on why you feel the way you do. It isn’t games, I legitimately do not know why so many people are so outraged about this Time magazine thing. You may say you’re just mad at how we’ve been responding to you, but either way you clearly have very strong feelings about the issue this thread is about.