One thing I like to do is make fun of conservative people, along with Nate. It’s great fun. Their ignorance about world issues, ignorance about national issues, ignorance about anything beyond the realms of pop culture and aphorisms, their habits, the ways they talk, and how one might name his son “Pabst” and enter a local Chinese restaurant only to order a “Kung-Fu Big Mac.” We’ll laugh straight for minutes. But even good jokes get old at some point, and I have to search for new material to target. It forces me to consider groups and demographics that I may not want to choose at first. Americans in general? Done. Lesbians? Can’t see what else we could say. Fundamentalist Christians? Too easy. Time to consider topics I identify with more. Environmentalists. Liberals. Semi-Intellectuals. Actually, making fun of environmentalists is pretty easy and fun to do. Them screaming greenies. They’re so nundy. (“Nundy” is a word I just made up right now, and it means stupid, farcical, pretentious, dumb, full-of-oneself or giving the appearance thereof, etc).The general public’s grasp of what environmentalism is is ghastly, and (maybe this is why) most of the commonly-held tenets of environmentalism themselves aren’t too well-defined or understood. Too many people believe A, B, and C because they think that’s what environmentalists do, and since environmentalists obviously care about saving the world, then A, B, and C will help do that. They’ll condemn those awful carbon dioxide emissions that will choke the planet and cause global warming. Calling it “global warming” is the number one noob mistake. The dwindling opposition will inevitably point out their number one counterargument: sometimes the globe warms. In fact, greenhouse gas emissions fluctuate yearly because there’s more land distributed in the northern hemisphere. It’s called climate change-or specifically, anthropogenic climate change. Human-caused global warming. This is what is meant. This whole climate change fiasco isn’t the major issue in environmentalism, and it’s not going to be solved by cap-and-trade carbon credits, carbon dioxide capture facilities, or anything bogus like that. We must simply stop emitting so many greenhouse gases. Even if we don’t, I don’t have much of a problem. The ultimate consequence is that we’re just getting into uncomfortable uncharted territory with our earth’s atmosphere here. We just don’t know the global ecological effects of releasing so many greenhouse gases so quickly into the atmosphere in such a short span of geological time. And there are varying estimates to how the earth, and its atmosphere, are. Proponents of the Gaia Hypothesis might believe the earth to be more resilient than we give it credit for. The problem is that we just don’t know what the limits are (if there are any) and what would be the resulting change in the climate. Then there are the people who think they’re “eco-friendly” (another term I don’t particularly care for) just because they recycled a plastic bottle or used less water today. As long as it’s within the context of American culture, you guys can just shut up as far as I’m concerned. We still consume a quarter of the world’s oil, use about 150 gallons of water a day, and package everything in essentially non-biodegradable plastic. Good for you for recycling that one bottle. It’s the placebo effect that’s making you an asshole right now, and that embarrasses the people who are really trying to think of ways to improve the world’s general health. What we really need is a legitimate opposition to our current culture of consumerism. If all this really does is just pass the problem from environmental scientists to politicians and lawyers, fine. At least it’s a positive step. One paradigm shift will not be by any means easy to instigate, and will require many levels of reinforcement from separate disciplines and groups. But it will be an attempt at a solution, more than what we can say about our culture’s present understanding of environmentalism. No wonder they’re confused. These crazy eco-green people are running around telling us to recycle that plastic fork when America as a whole burns so much more fuel and produces more garbage per person in the world. The real issue here is sustainability. We could innocently burn all the fossil fuels we wanted to if they were 1) a sustainable energy resource and 2) if we knew that people, other organisms, and the earth’s atmosphere could sustain the influx in atmospheric greenhouse gases.
I came here to talk about how i wanted to branch out and make fun of new types of people and ended up ranting about those screaming greenies. and I could keep on blathering about what’s wrong with environmentalism for hours, I bet. only one example of making fun of a new demographic (and actually, this was serious. I wasn’t really jesting), but I may get to the others later. and they’ll be more satirical. I always do this, and now i should really go to bed. but before i do, I have one closing thing to say:
two celebrities that annoy the hell out of me: zooey deschanel and michael cera. why? they’ve both been in bad movies that i’ve actually seen. respectively, all the real girls and juno. and i’m willing to bet michael cera’s been in some worse movies too, but thank goodness I haven’t seen them yet. also, they both look pretentious and annoying and i have a suspicion that both might be jerks in real life although this is completely based on nothing. i’d include pictures of them so you could see for yourself how nundy they look, but you probably have internet and can google them right now if you don’t know who they are. if you put them in a room with some feta cheese and i entered it, i would probably throw up from my ears.
