Why are white men hogging all the glory in environmental groups, not allowing women to have leadership roles?

Why are white men hogging all the glory in environmental groups, not allowing women to have leadership roles?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Trust_Limited
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Goldberg

>Women
>Leadership

Bitches are cool but they can't lead anyone but other bitches.

>men do thing
>it bad
cool

This article gave me cancer

Better get a female oncologist to prove you're not sexist.

>climate change affects minorities and women, the elderly and the poor
>implying men aren't affected by it
>implying the only reason to help the planet is for selfish reasons

every...single...time

fpbp

>Goldberg

>GOLDEN
>FUCKING
>BERG

Why does the guardian still exist? Aren't they losing money or something?

I think all newspapers are losing money. Their online presence doesn't help much, which is why they're turning to paid subscriptions, which nobody wants.

Women complain.

Men do.

>jewish people complaining about over representation in anything

They're being bought up by rich people to serve as personal propaganda outlets. Losing money doesn't matter as much as getting their message pushed.

>environmental groups
>inb4 it's "stop nuclear! kill the logging industry! build more wind turbines!"
>w-white men caused all the worlds problems, they should pay
>white men are trying to fix a problem without our help! stop them!
also
>that doesn't look like progress
>all of the massive technological advancements made in the last 20 years
>not progress

White men can literally not do anything right to these people. They would rather that white men were eradicated completely.

>White men take initiative
>WAAAAAH WHY AREN'T YOU INCLUDING NON-WHITES AND WOMEN
>White men don't take initiative
>GREEDY WHITE MEN KEEPING DOWN POC AND WOMEN ONCE AGAIN

i want off this fucking ride. I want off RIGHT NOW. DO YOU HEAR ME I WANT OFF AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH

>care more about the skin colour and genitals of the leadership rather than the movement and effort to preserve the planet
I have a better grief

My environmentalism movement has been hijacked by Marxists who use it to push Marxist agenda that has nothing to do with the environment and has extremely few verifiable positive effects. I literally can't say I'm a libertarian who cares about environmentalism without getting some sceptical looks.

How about that faggots? I don't care what demographic you are, just that you hijacked my efforts to stop coal, build nuclear power plants and fund solar research with your Marxist, class/ethnic warfare bullshit. You're the reason no one takes Greenies seriously just like Hitler is the reason no one takes nationalists seriously.

The Guardian is run through profits of other companies, it is literally funded from the blood, sweat and tears of working people. It is literally a propaganda mouthpiece.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Trust_Limited

It's a major problem, green political parties seem extremely laughable. Whackjob economically ruinous politically motivated policies using environmentalism as a soap box, just because environmentalism was a major political point in the previous decade.

Thank god nobody votes for them here, even though environmentalist sentiment is surprisingly, but rightly, strong in places

Okay, but I just want environmental responsibility. I want my environmental ideas taken seriously.

My ideal system can be left for hundreds of years and will tend to stability with few consequences, a perfectly unconstrained economy, aka actual ancap, in my opinion, would inevitably cause negative consequences and for the purpose of this thread I'll argue those are devastating to the environment. It wouldn't last long.

For instance, coal is actually the cheapest fuel. You can buy a bunch of coal, actually, don't even bother, cut down nearby trees, cover them with whatever rotting material you can find and heat it up for charcoal. You could power factories and homes much cheaper than oil and even nuclear.

But this would cause more radioactivity than nuclear!

So I'd expect in an ancap society people would focus on that short term gain of cheaper fuel and probably wouldn't give a fuck, which is where I step on the NAP and force people not to use coal, either by taxing it out the arse, restricting exports or just banning it entirely. For some issues, people must be forced to care, as unfortunate as that is.

I still consider myself a libertarian, but our planet would easily have a runaway effect if everyone burned coal. I'm not an extremist, so I can always see flaws in my own ideology, a pure free market would be disasterous.

When I say I'm a greeny, I really mean stop coal.

>tfw this post was powered by a coal power plant
FUCK EVERYTHING NUCLEAR NOW

>allowing women to have leadership
>allow
>leadership
You take the lead, you don't beg someone to "allow" you to have it.

>allow
>leadership
Mutually exclusive terms