• bl4kers@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    4 days ago

    That’s a pretty ridiculous headline imo

    • Nickel is used for lots of things
    • “EV obsession” is not a thing unless “ICE obsession” exists, and both sound ridiculous
    • The mining companies are responsible for their own actions, not consumers at large
    • Indonesia is letting this occur and could theoretically step in at any time as far as I can tell
    • Genocides are always on “an entire population” so that phrase is meaningless
    • Garibaldee@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      I categorically disagree, and callous people like you are the reason why something like this is allowed to happen in the first place

      • leisesprecher@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        4 days ago

        Will you categorically stomp your foot and ignore every single argument in that comment as well? Because you’re almost there!

        Blaming consumers for things that happen at least three indirections removed from them is childish. A consumer cannot know where all the resources are coming from.

        Blaming EVs for this, is just as childish, if not actively evil, since the alternative would be oil extraction and that’s not exactly clean and happy either.

        • Garibaldee@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          You’re so smart! I surrender, don’t think I’m cut out for the marketplace of ideas!

          Maybe just maybe it is bad to be mining resources from uncontacted tribes who could not possibly consent to any of this, no matter how much you want to abstract it and say it’s no one’s fault for doing it.

          • leisesprecher@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            3 days ago

            See, if you would have read my comment and actually bothered to understand it, you would have seen, that I haven’t said no one is at fault here.

            So I have to assume, you’re arguing in bad faith, you’re putting words in my mouth to defeat a straw man, while not addressing any of my actual points.

            So maybe pull that infantile sarcasm out of your ass and try actually thinking about what you’re saying.

    • wellfill@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      What do you mean by your last point. Genocide only being on whole population. Where did you get this definition.

        • wellfill@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          So you dont have a source of this definition? Because in international law its defined quite differently, which is quite obvious since your definition, as given, would not classify many real instances as genocide.

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’s the entomology of the word.

            Legally they have a definition which broadens the concept to not just direct killing of a people, but also acts that lead to the eradication of a culture. For example: kidnapping the children of a group and raising the within your own culture is a genocidal act as it leads to the culture dying off, even though no actual killing has taken place.