I'm Jon, Just turned 19 and I'm the cutest barista I know. (He/Him pronouns) Snapchat: chandler_google 🍁 STAY HIGH TILL I DIE 🌳 ENTP, ADD, D&D, Scorpio, Passionately Bad Dancer, Bisexual, Slightly Above Average At Writing Descriptions
This is the nature of everyone else vs. black people’s hair summed up in two gifs.
You touch ours willy-fucking nilly but are repulsed when someone DARES to invade your precious boundaries. I see you double standard, I fucking see you.
Instead of denying threats to the planet, far-right propagandists seize on them as another means of sowing racial panic.
But either way, these authors [the Christchurch and El Paso shooters] see an opening. For years, progressives have hoped the right would acknowledge the environmental dangers menacing the planet in an age of climate change. Now, at least rhetorically, more conservatives are. But instead of endorsing pollution controls and carbon-emissions treaties, many are offering a different answer to environmental danger: Keep nonwhite immigrants out.
What we’re witnessing is less the birth of white-nationalist environmentalism than its rebirth. In earlier periods of American history, nativism and environmentalism were deeply intertwined. The Nation recently reminded readers that Madison Grant, who in the early 20th century helped found the Save the Redwoods League and the National Parks Association, also served as vice president of the Immigration Restriction League, which successfully lobbied to cut off most eastern and southern European immigration to the United States in 1924. Grant, whose 1916 book, The Passing of the Great Race, proposed a racial hierarchy of European peoples and greatly impressed Adolf Hitler, saw no contradiction between his environmentalism and his racism. To the contrary, wrote his biographer, Jonathan Spiro, he “dedicated his life to saving endangered fauna, flora, and natural resources; and it did not seem at all strange to his peers that he would also try to save his own endangered race.” [...]
More recently, though, as progressives have coalesced around support for immigration, environmentalists have too. Their evolution has paralleled the American labor movement, which in recent decades has jettisoned its own restrictionist past.
All this has left a vacuum that white nationalists are moving to fill. While climate-change denial remains pervasive on the American right, it grows harder to sustain with each new environmental horror. Meanwhile, opposition to immigration plays an ever-greater role in defining the conservative movement. In June, when Reuters asked Republicans to name their top priority, immigration bested the second highest answer by more than three to one.
The result is a rising white-nationalist environmentalism that blames overpopulation on nonwhite immigrants, insists that they cannot appreciate the ecology of the countries to which they move, and embraces pseudoscientific claims that ethnic groups belong in their native habitats. These contentions are ludicrous. As Hultgren explained to me, “the data suggests that there is no empirical linkage between immigration and environmental degradation, and some studies even suggest a negative correlation.” Large corporations and the wealthy consume the most environmental resources, not poor immigrants.
But rather than support policies that would burden white Christians, more and more figures on the right are using immigrants and racial minorities as environmental scapegoats. The authors of the El Paso and Christchurch manifestos aren’t the only culprits. Ann Coulter once mocked concerns about climate change. But more recently, she’s added it to her arsenal of bigoted arguments. In a 2017 column entitled “Choose Between a Green America And a Brown America,” she argued that “mass Third World immigration is a triple whammy for the environment because: 1. Millions more people are tromping through our country; 2. The new people do not share Americans’ love of nature and cleanliness; and 3. We’re not allowed to criticize them.” Last year she tweeted that “I’m fine with pretending to believe in global warming if we can save our language, culture & borders” in the process.
Tucker Carlson seems headed down a similar path. In August of last year he noted, “I actually hate litter, which is one of the reasons I’m so against illegal immigration.” In December, he added that “illegal immigration comes at a huge cost to our environment.” The Federalist chimed in that “Tucker Carlson Is Absolutely Right: Illegal Immigration Is Destroying the Environment.” A former Tea Party activist and Breitbart contributor named Debbie Dooley has even created something called the Green Tea Party, which lobbies for both tougher immigration restrictions and tougher environmental standards. [...]
The white-nationalist environmentalism rising in Europe and the United States exposes the limits of the progressive imagination. Barack Obama promised that the Republican Party’s “fever” would eventually break. The implication was that when conservatives acknowledged the problems that liberals said plagued the country, they would endorse liberal remedies, or at least watered-down versions of them.
It’s not turning out that way. More than any GOP nominee in decades, President Donald Trump accepted the left’s argument that corporate-dominated capitalism was failing American workers. Yet rather than embrace a progressive agenda—higher taxes, tougher regulation, stronger labor unions—Trump has enacted a nationalist one: tariffs on incoming goods and a brutal crackdown on undocumented immigrants.
Now something similar may be happening with the environment. Progressives may hope climate change breeds the global solidarity necessary to bridge divides of faith, race, and nation. But white nationalists are trying to win converts with a different message: that in a world of growing scarcity, it’s every race for itself.
You can’t even say something like “I’m not into politics” or even the #woke version “I’m not educated enough on this matter to have a side” or something because even children know Nazis Are, like, Bad
I understand why people dislike leather and animal products. But leather is such a good resource? Like… My mom bought a sturdy leather coat in 1989. I’m in my 20’s and I now wear that coat. That’s a 30 year old coat? 30 years, two generations, one coat. Versus, like… A plastic one, that rips and gets thrown out, or releases bits into the ecosystem every time it’s washed, takes a billion years to decompose, lasts maybe a decade if you’re super duper careful, and uses oil products in it’s construction.
Like, yeah leather is expensive and comes from a living animal, and I’m not saying that you should go out and buy fifty fur and leather products for the he’ll of it, but like… Maybe the compromise is worth it?
One animal product, valued and respected and worn down for generations, versus like… Six plastic products that will never ever go away?
this is why im so fucking pissed white colonial fucks and white vegans get so enraged at indigenous people for using hides/leather and animal bones as if that shit breaks or rips like cheap polyester does
Reminds me of the Vdara Hotel (AKA “death ray hotel”) in Las Vegas which has a curved windowed design that focuses searing hot rays onto the pool area, increasing temps by ~20° F.