YMLADRIS: komentar na to od nekoho (noname clovek)
Eric Wright I’m gonna run down each level and give my opinion on that. ty for opening up discussion
1: seems accurate, but overlap happens in people who profess not to be conservative as well (usually deep red-blackpills such as those who subscribe to Q-anon theories and flat-earthers)
2: accurate; examples are typically far-right pundits
3: typical conservative thinking, the wording they may have objection to (small gov focused; gov must be small and only to serve to get out of the way of economy)
4: mainstream independent or right-leaning ideology, can bleed into typical US or UK liberal ideology, antivaxxers have a general skepticism for science but will also accept most of this
5: common centrist/technocratic thought, see elon musk, bill nye, neil degrasse tyson
6: left leaning US/UK/Aus liberal thought, still technocratic but more interested in regulation and understanding capitalism has direct responsibility to climate change
7: common climate advocacy with strong political left bias. the earliest entry point in accepting ideas more radical than theirs.
8: cut-off point for centrist/technocratic thought to accept climate change solutions, and cut-off point for reform standards while maintaining extant governance before radical dismantling/reconstruction. First point of radical change and a useful platform to tow the line for climate advocacy
9: radical green-pill; advocating for a complete revolution of society. entertains misanthropic and doomer tendencies, but does not fully embrace them. often anarcho-primitivist. deep exploration of anti-industrial solutions
10: climate defeatism focused on individualist ideology conditioned from western thought, readily accepts misanthropic tendencies such as ‘humans are the virus’. Ironically can share overlap with 1: based on suspicion, distrust and paranoia. entry level for eco-fascism
with that said, from my own expereince I’d like to offer a parallel breakdown starting at 9:
9a: climate change is responsible for a mass extinction event, but not necessarily guaranteed extinction of all species (or even just humans alone). Does not really concern themselves with the outcome but rather what they can do within an organizational, communal and well researched capacity to effect as much solutions as possible to mitigate damage. Makes efforts to appear legitimate while working towards 10a (see Earth First!, ELF, XR)
10a: a well organized group proactively making dramatic changes against forces that exacerbate climate change. Utilize radical militant tactics to dismantle accereration and force degrowth. Considered a terrorist threat by many governments. Often incorporating indigenous sovereignty in their tactics (see EZLN)