this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
113 points (98.3% liked)

politics

22251 readers
331 users here now

Protests, dual power, and even electoralism.

Labour and union posts go to [email protected].

Take the dunks to /c/strugglesession or [email protected].

[email protected] is good for shitposting.

Do not post direct links to reactionary sites.

Off topic posts will be removed.

Follow the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember we're all comrades here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

72% is shockingly high tbh. Makes me think the question wasn't phrased well. Or maybe the chuds in other G20 countries don't shit their pants if you mention that climate change is real?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Occam's Razor. "Should we send politicians to jail--" "Yes" "--for climate crimes? "

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

We can see the phrasing, at least in English:

It should be a criminal offence for leaders of large businesses or senior government officials to approve or permit actions they know are likely to cause damage to nature and climate that is widespread, long term or cannot ​be reversed

The responses “Strongly agree” and “Tend to agree” with the statement are the 72%

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

that they know

How do we prove, definitively, what they knew at the time?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Looking at their emails and other messages to see if those risks were communicated and ignored. Forcing them to produce documents researching and stating their potential impact before they're allowed to undergo certain actions. Using common sense like "dumping garbage in a river is bad".