The price of rice is skyrocketing, and it's pushing millions more people towards starvation
The price of rice is skyrocketing, and it's pushing millions more people towards starvation
The Indian rice export ban, the war in Ukraine and El Niño are combining to create a "doom loop" for the world's poorest people, as staple food prices soar.
The Indian rice export ban, the war in Ukraine and El Niño are combining to create a "doom loop" for the world's poorest people, as staple food prices soar.
You're viewing a single thread.
-
Ok... Now let's see the positive effects of less people...
Climate change certainly gets a little less fuel...
-
Referring to the potential starvation deaths of a large group of people as a positive for climate change is like saying you’re glad someone died early from a car accident instead of suicide.
-
-
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/JwI2NrVYqIE
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
-
This bot needs to die, or at least be upfront about what it is. I'm fine with piracy, but don't dress it up as "privacy respecting open source". If you don't agree with Youtube's model, then just don't use it.
-
Alternate frontends may break youtube's TOS, but they're not piracy
-
Do we have /r/hailcorporate on Fedi yet?
-
Look, I love using pipe-viewer, but I'm not childish enough to think it isn't piracy. But I guess whatever you feel your entitled to...
-
-
-
-
-
Yes, but im just a very positive thinker today!
(is irony dead? Does everything need the /s? Are people so insane they think someone would writing that in a serious note...)
-
Honestly? Yeah, I thought you were serious, because I’ve seen that attitude expressed before. Generally it’s more “this hazy, unspecified population can be sacrificed to help me deal with the existential dread that me and my world are walking off a cliff” than “dear me I so DO delight in death”, but it makes my teeth ache.
Thank you for clarifying, and I’m sorry for jumping on you.
-
I didn't think he was serious, fwiw.
-
For real? (serious) a nuclear war might be beneficial because mostly citys of big polluters will be taken out, starvation always hits those that already basically don't pollute. So that argument would make 0 sense regardless...
And i don't think a nuclear war is exactly what we want... There are better ways than to suicide on species level...
-
Nuclear Winter about to solve climate change /s & If there is nothing left to safe there is no need for any efforts /s
I think there might be better alternatives including less suffering
-
So you agreed with me?
-
-
-
-
From the rest of your comment history? Yes, it's entirely believable. It's more surprising that you're walking it back, really.
-
Eh, the way it was written I wouldn’t have read it as sarcasm. Text and tone yada yada. That said, I’ve definitely seen people who seriously think like this.
-
For real? (serious) a nuclear war might be beneficial because mostly citys of big polluters will be taken out, starvation always hits those that already basically don't pollute. So that argument would make 0 sense regardless...
And i don't think a nuclear war is exactly what we want... There are better ways than to suicide on species level...
Edit to clarify that im not in favor of nuclear war...
-
It's called Malthusianism (after the philosopher Malthus) and, yes, it is a real philosophy.
-
Sounds like a special form of nihilism...
-
Sort of. Malthusians believe that disasters which take out large numbers of people help to keep the population in check and are therefore necessary. Obviously a little oversimplified, but that's about what it boils down to.
-
Sounds somewhat reasonable and nuts at the same time.
Like some sad people that lost people in a Desaster saying it was for the greater good when in reality its ultimately meaningless.
-
It's not an illogical stance; it's just one that requires you to become less empathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Completely honest, I lean a little bit more towards nuclear annihilation every day
-
Tbh, i can see why... But maybe things get better (hopefully) (im atheist but please god let it rain some braincells for the people)
-
-
-
-
Literally no way to discern whether it was a sarcastic joke or if you were legitimately an eco-fascist
-
My entire existence is basically a joke so don't take me too serious.
In general its a better approach to think everything on the internet is satire until clarified that its not, way better for your believe in humanity, trust me.
-
I see a lot of people on the internet say some pretty horrible shit with a lot of conviction. Sorry that you’re having a rough time. Hopefully adding more clarity to your communication helps a bit.
-
Yeah im going to put the /s behind it in the future /s (i will probably forget about it...)
-
-
-
-
-
-
Those who can not afford to eat are probably not making much CO2 emissions.
-
Yeah, once they cannot afford the food they stop making any CO2.
-
Exactly.
-
Not sure if you caught the text of what they’re saying: people who can’t afford to eat rice starving to death aren’t removing much of humanity’s carbon footprint.
-
Look further down the thread, its a joke and i know that.
-
Where you suggest twice that nuclear war would be good or that your whole life is a joke?
I feel fucked up ways about stuff too. Nothing wrong with it and all that negativity’s gotta go somewhere. Just wanted to head the ecofascism train off at the pass.
-
I literally clarified that while it would help against climate change its not something that is a good option at all and that im against it...
Its a Example of some fucked up view that would at least make sense on a technical level, unlike making food prices higher and killing those that already don't pollute like at all...
-
It doesn’t make sense even on a technical level. Cities are all near water and their fallout plumes would irradiate huge swaths of the earth to the east in addition to everything downstream.
The infrastructure of civilization is all clustered around cities as well, so we’d lose access to the best spots to live.
I got nothing but sympathy for you, thirty years ago that bit would have killed. Today everyone assumes you’re serious.
-
No humans = No worries about climate change...
So it does work. The point is that its absolutely not a Reasonable option at all.
Also nukes aren't dirty bombs, they don't do that much radiation, most of the nuclear material gets turned into pure fusion energy. So they are kinda environmentally friendly in a way...
-
Good troll. You got me.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's culling the wrong demographic. Removing poor people is the least efficient. Removing the poorest will have the least effect possible.
These comments always make me wonder wether it's a lack of education, bad taste or racism.
-
Can people like you maybe read a little further down the thread, like i literally explained in detail why that comment is completely ridiculous and i don't understand how someone could take it as a serious comment.
Its literally a joke.
-
Yes, I read it before. No, it didn't change much. Where's the joke, what's funny about this?
On the other hand, too many people write these comments seriously, which is enough reason to counter them.
It's downplaying the climate crisis and normalizing racism. You can insist it was done in a lighthearted way, but that's not so relevant.
-
-
No one needs poor.
-
Except the people who prefer to pay less for their goods and services. They depend on people willing / forced to work for very little; they need the poor.
Also this is not a business where you could hire and fire people based on what is 'needed', and you're not the boss.
These are humans with exactly the same right to food as you.
-
They are nothing but numbers in a spreadsheet.
-
-
-
-