Luxury climate “activism”
This headline looks like a rebuke of Steven Spielberg’s absurd “climate activism” in light of his purchase of a gigantic yacht, but the article offers no hint of rebuke or even surprise.
Mind you, that’s also not a headline – it’s a lede where a headline should be.
Anyway. Spielberg sold one giant yacht and bought another. Conclusion: Spielberg is in no sense a “climate activist.” A climate vandal, yes, but activist, no.
The $250 million vessel built in 2022 can accommodate 14 guests in 7 suites serviced by a crew of 30. While details are scarce at this point, Superyachtfan has observed a large swimming pool on the main deck and a spa pool on the sundeck. As the predecessor flaunted cabins with wardrobes, desk space, a private bathroom, a ballroom size main saloon, 17 televisions, several spas, and stellar diving equipment, the new pleasure craft will undoubtedly bring more to the table.
Yes: an enormous climate burden for one guy.
Hypocrisy is scalable, QED.
Can’t climate activist mean someone who is actively making the climate worse?
Now if only it was the rich fucks doing the polluting; we’d be ok then
There’s perhaps a confusion here. Being an activist in no way entails commitment to a cause or its principles. Activism is, after all, about action, not belief. Activism is largely performance, whether those engaged in it realize this fact or not. It’s much like religion in that many profess belief, but if they truly believed, they’d act differently.
Well that’s not really true, or it’s true in the literal sense, in that active means active, but in practice the word does carry some implications about belief or stance or the like. We don’t take “climate activism” to mean energetically working to make the planet hotter. Also lots of people call themselves activists when they don’t actually do anything (apart from talking).
My point was that while there are implications in the sense of connotations, there’s no material implication in the strictly logical sense
Ok – I did say “in no sense” so I see the point of your point (now that I’ve reminded myself what I said).