Reply to EPA Head Zeldin on "Ruthless" podcast

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "EPA Head Zeldin on "Ruthless" podcast"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Separate but related note

What makes MAGA so selfish and resistant to facts?  Like how can some humans care about others and some have zero empathy and zero facts and be so oddly short-sighted?

Serious question [/quote]

Many reasons - Many conservatives resist climate action due to tribalism, industry influence, and ideological framing.

Tribal loyalty trumps facts: Climate science is politicized, with figures like Trump clinging to outdated myths (e.g. 1970s-era solar inefficiency, “windmills kill whales”) and cherry-picked tidbits like bird deaths, ignoring fossil fuels’ far greater impact.

Industry-funded doubt: Fossil fuel interests bankroll think tanks to sow skepticism, framing emergent clean technologies as threats - even though wind and solar create jobs, boost energy independence, and grow the economy.

Media distortion: Right-leaning media amplifies fear, uncertainty, and ridicule, painting climate advocates as elitist alarmists and reinforcing feedback loops of denial.

Distrust of regulation: Climate policy is viewed as a Trojan horse for government overreach. But nature doesn’t care about borders - atmospheric physics don’t bend to sovereignty or ideology.

Scientific illiteracy: Words like “theory” are misconstrued as guesswork, and models dismissed as speculation, despite decades of empirical validation.

Empathy gap and short-sightedness: Impacts are seen as distant, abstract or irrelevant, with little concern for future generations or vulnerable communities.

Reactionary backlash: For some, opposing climate action is just another way to “own the libs” - even if the fallout hits everyone.[/quote]

Thank you for this.

What does religion have to do with climate change?  I'm not Christian - does Christianity advocate for putting toxic chemicals into the air and water and food supply?  Is this why they brainwash kids to want these things too?  I can't imaging that any God would tell the followers to go out of their way to kill as many people/animals/plants as possible by poisoning them.  Certainly the God of my religion doesn't want that (as far as I can tell), but I'm not familiar with the Christian concept of God. Please elaborate.

What does MAGA gain from climate change?  Like why do they want climate change so badly?  I understand the decision makers at the top gain money from the fossil fuel industry so there is that short term selfish gain, although they are sacrificing their children for more money than can even be spent.  But what does the rest of MAGA gain from denying climate change?  It seems to me all they get is "owning the libs" which is just bizarrely stupid bc MAGA population will die off first.  So they would rather die and have their children die just to "own the libs" rather than be gainfully employed, healthy, and with clean water/air?

Distrust of regulation - Ok, I kinda see that perspective, but then why is regulation around food dye accepted or regulation around abortion ok, or govt regulation around what you can and cannot say accepted (regulating free speech, banning books,etc)?  Throws the "I don't like regulation of climate policy" argument out the window.

So, it seems all we are left with is the fossil fuel industry paying decision maker politicians and paying off "religious" leaders to make policy in their favor and convince the masses to support their industry... oh and owning the libs.   :shock: [/quote]

For some MAGAs, climate change denial is indeed a religion.   Many MAGAs are just anti-science skeptics who have been swayed by fossil-fuel-funded disinformation and propaganda.  However, there are also many white, evangelical MAGA supporters who have been among the most consistent climate change deniers, and for many of them, Dominionist theology is at the core - that's the belief that Christians are commanded to control and shape society, including how we treat the planet.  Their views are less a matter of theology but more politics, identity and apocalyptic belief.  For them:

Climate science is often seen as anti-God, anti-America, or part of a globalist hoax.
Earth isn’t something to protect—it’s something to “subdue,” per Genesis.
End-times thinking makes environmental collapse seem inevitable or irrelevant.
Regulation and climate treaties? Viewed as threats to freedom and sovereignty.

This is all cultish thinking on their part, with no real basis in reality.  Yet it persists strongly.   I love that someone brought up CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer.  It destroys a lot of the narrative, whether religious, or skeptical alike.  The skeptics say things like "man can't possibly be having that much of an effect on the atmosphere because it's so vast" - yet CFCs created a dangerous hole in the ozone layer, proving man can indeed have a significant effect.  But then there's the pivot to, "even if climate change is real, we can't really do anything about it / why should we if China isn't / oh but why bother with vehicle emissions if we aren't also doing x, y, z" which also picks up the apocalyptic religious MAGAs waiting for the "End Times" - the fact that the world was able to come together and solve the CFC issue to mend the hole in the ozone layer SHOWS that we can potentially still fix it.  And, the arguments work both ways - because Trump backing out of the Paris climate accord gave China a way out.  Returning to the table puts China back on the hook.  Meanwhile the MAGAs also ignore the fact that China HAS NOT given up, and in fact is putting in more renewable power via solar, wind, and advanced technologies like thorium reactors than the rest of the world combined.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics