Requiem for a Civilised Conversation about Climate Change and Politics

[rangerrebew]

 
Requiem for a Civilised Conversation about Climate Change and Politics
21 minutes ago Eric Worrall 3 Comments
Essay by Eric Worrall

“How do we return to that common conversation?” asked President Obama. But for team Obama, there never seems to be an effort to turn that attempt at introspection on themselves.

In 2023 President Obama complained it was impossible for people to have a conversation about issues like climate change with people who didn’t share a common set of facts. But I believe the malaise goes much deeper.

… “Today what I’m most concerned about is the fact that, because of the splintering of the media we almost occupy different realities, right? If something happens that, you know, in the past everybody could say, ‘All right, we may disagree on how to solve it, but at least we all agree that, yeah, that’s an issue.’ Now people will say, ‘Well, that didn’t happen,’ or, ‘I don’t believe that,’ or, ‘I don’t care about the science,’ or, ‘I’m not concerned about these experts, you know, ’cause they’re just all liberals’ or, you know, ‘That’s just conservative propaganda.'”

“And one of, I think, the goals of the Obama Foundation and one of the goals of my post-presidency is: How do we return to that common conversation? How can we have a common set of facts?” …

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/07/08/requiem-for-a-lost-political-and-climate-consensus/

[Cyber Liberty]

As usual, O'Bastard tries to fix the blame any anybody else, while completely missing his own role in it.

[DefiantMassRINO]

They usually start the conversation with "There's no debating that ..."
They proceed to say that the "science is settled".

They've made their choices and closed their minds.

With critical thinking, everything is open for logical debate at any time by any one for any logical reason.  The position is best backed by the best empirical evidence will best withstand scrutiny and critique.

Science, a form of critical thinking and proof, is never settled.  If "the science is settled", we can stop paying the scientists.

A far as politics ... ugh ... it's pointless.  They are making their arugments based upon "feelings" and "emotions".  You can't combat that with logic, reason, evidence, science, etc.  The best you can hope to do is make the best case to the undecideds.  Directly engaging liberals is a trap and a waste of resources because they are being unreasonable.

You put your stake in the ground, and plow foward like a bulldozer or steam roller.

They only want bi-partisanism when they don't have a supermajority, as evidenced by the lack of Dems' unwillingness to engage in "bi-partisanism" while ramming Obamacare down our throats in Budget Reconciliation.

Social Justice Reform is just re-braned 1970s limousine liberal bleeding heart liberalism.

You just have to be stalwart and call things what they are.  Global Climate Change is a Communist fraud perpetrated upon the West.  Illegal Immigration is about Dem's manipulating the 2030 Census to better favor them during Apportionment.

They failed to deliver on the immigration law enforcement they promised in 1987, in exchange for amnesty for 11 million illegal alien foreigners.  They can't be trusted to follow-up and follow-through on their backend deliverables and commitments.

I will not give them any room or any quarter.  If they want to "talk", my first question is "what are you giving me in return ... upfront ... in cash?"  Nothing for anything less than cash in hand upfront.  If they have nothing for me now, I have the same for them.

Immediate reciprocity in the moment is all I'll accept from the other side.  That's my price for "Civilized  Conversation" because they only want to converse with me when they need something from me ... just like my deadbeat relatives.