With this summer being as severe as it is I think it might be worth it to start pressuring the alternative energy crowd on why they’re so reticent on nuclear
The entire argument against it seems to be based on the assumption that solar, water, and wind are cheap, waste free, and scale more efficiently (not exactly) or imagining that nuclear has been relatively unchanged since like Three Mile Island or Chernobyl and the potential for disaster is as great (very much not exactly) or even that it’s one or the other (come the fuck on)
I think this every time a callout post shows up, but: an environment in which anyone who says something flawed (or perceived to be flawed by someone with significant social clout) is seen as morally tainted, in which said flaw or mistake is seen as more emblematic of who someone “truly is underneath” than any and all earnest attempts to do right up until that point or after, in which any apology is viewed as a smokescreen or “doubling down”, and in which association with anyone so identified is enough to also demonstrate that innate moral taint in the associate—that is an environment in which essentially nobody can ever speak up or express curiosity about any kind of bigotry whatsoever for fear of the above happening. And it seems to me that’s obviously counter to building a community ostensibly focused on combating bigotry.
If the only way to “participate” in complicated discussions of complicated problems is to have total adherence to the exact rhetoric (based on the same assumed knowledge background) of whatever group or person has the most social capital, then you don’t really have a politically forward-looking community, you actually have a hierarchical system of social control that is just pretending to be one. And its probably going to implode the instant two parties of comparable social capital happen to disagree on something.
