• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Social Greta Thunberg Megathread

She's all over my god damn facebook as "the champion of global warming!" because what she says makes sooo much sense apparently.

My liberal friend posted about her like she was the next coming of Jesus Christ. Onenof the replies was that she's being exploited. So what does my friend do? Accuse the person of being mentally ill and "off their meds" and that they were being blocked.
 
He was a small-time education activist who ran a school and who advocated for girls being allowed to attend school, therefore he encouraged his daughter to attend school. His daughter was attacked in part because she was his daughter and in part because she was also an outspoken advocate for girls attending school including writing a blog about the topic for BBC.

Unless you can show me what political connections he had or back your point that he was already a member a of the UN as you claimed I don't see any sort of shady global conspiracy to allow girls to attend school.

The story of Malala is not exactly as the people who push her story would have you believe and I'm sure we are not getting the entire story regarding Greta's sudden popularity.

Malala was already writing a blog for the BBC, interviewing with the NYT and was the subject of a documentary years before she was shot in 2009. She was already gaining political and international media exposure before she was shot. You think that just happened by chance? Her family hired a top public relations firm after she was shot. Her rise to fame was not just some random occurrence.

She was shot because of the strong anti-taliban message being pushed by both her and her father not because she was a girl who wanted an education.

Why Pakistan Hates Malala

The disclosure in 2013 that Malala’s family had retained Edelman, a top American public relations firm, to assist with her media management has only heightened these suspicions. So have the views of Malala and her father, Ziauddin, which align with many in the West. Ziauddin has been associated with the Awami National Party, a leftist and secular political party in a conservative and deeply religious country. Even before Malala was shot, they were both championing girls’ education. Malala was also writing blogs (albeit anonymously) for the BBC and giving interviews to the New York Times (she was the subject of a gripping 2009 Times documentary film). The core themes in the messaging of Malala and her father in those earlier times — opposition to the Taliban and the importance of educational opportunities for girls — resonated in the West, and to a significant extent in Pakistan as well. However, in a conservative and patriarchal society like Pakistan’s, such views nonetheless displeased many. The fact that these opinions were imparted to prominent Western publications likely attracted suspicion as well.

Tellingly, a Taliban commander later claimed in an open letter to Malala that his organization targeted her not because of her education advocacy, but rather her anti-Taliban “propaganda.

Malala was not living in abject poverty in her early years; her father owned a school and was an English-speaking activist. Additionally, she enjoyed the privilege of strong connections to the Western media; she was writing for the BBC, after all, even before she was shot.
 
Facebook is where Liberals tell eveyone how to vote!

I deleted all of my direct social media accounts years ago, and stopped watching virtually all television programming around the same time.
 
I deleted all of my direct social media accounts years ago, and stopped watching virtually all television programming around the same time.
I have a son that his extended family members love seeing pictures of.

It has it's uses. Political debates or messaging should not be one of them.
 
If she were some sort of ecology science prodigy with actual solutions presented I’d be really interested in what she had to say.

But instead her mom is a nutty left wing activist , her parents are actors. So her having Asbergers makes this political theater literally autistic screeching.
It’s embarrassing to acknowledge this as anything but that.

Why is her Aspergers relevant?

Scientists do science. They are not activists. Different skill set.
 
Last edited:
The story of Malala is not exactly as the people who push her story would have you believe and I'm sure we are not getting the entire story regarding Greta's sudden popularity.

Malala was already writing a blog for the BBC, interviewing with the NYT and was the subject of a documentary years before she was shot in 2009. She was already gaining political and international media exposure before she was shot. You think that just happened by chance? Her family hired a top public relations firm after she was shot. Her rise to fame was not just some random occurrence.

She was shot because of the strong anti-taliban message being pushed by both her and her father not because she was a girl who wanted an education.

Why Pakistan Hates Malala

The disclosure in 2013 that Malala’s family had retained Edelman, a top American public relations firm, to assist with her media management has only heightened these suspicions. So have the views of Malala and her father, Ziauddin, which align with many in the West. Ziauddin has been associated with the Awami National Party, a leftist and secular political party in a conservative and deeply religious country. Even before Malala was shot, they were both championing girls’ education. Malala was also writing blogs (albeit anonymously) for the BBC and giving interviews to the New York Times (she was the subject of a gripping 2009 Times documentary film). The core themes in the messaging of Malala and her father in those earlier times — opposition to the Taliban and the importance of educational opportunities for girls — resonated in the West, and to a significant extent in Pakistan as well. However, in a conservative and patriarchal society like Pakistan’s, such views nonetheless displeased many. The fact that these opinions were imparted to prominent Western publications likely attracted suspicion as well.

Tellingly, a Taliban commander later claimed in an open letter to Malala that his organization targeted her not because of her education advocacy, but rather her anti-Taliban “propaganda.

Malala was not living in abject poverty in her early years; her father owned a school and was an English-speaking activist. Additionally, she enjoyed the privilege of strong connections to the Western media; she was writing for the BBC, after all, even before she was shot.

Her writing for the BBC and advocating for the education of girls has been public since before she was attacked as evidenced by the fact that "she was writing for the BBC." She was physically attacked, actually they attempted to kill her, because she was advocating for girls education. I'm not seeing the conspiracy.

You act like kids getting help from adults to follow their dreams is bad.. Adults run the world not kids and as a result they are often involved in a child's success. For instance, Taylor Swift wanted to make music and was good at it. She got help from her parents to do so. I'm not sure how that help diminishes Taylor Swifts skills and success though.
 
If she were some sort of ecology science prodigy with actual solutions presented I’d be really interested in what she had to say.

But instead her mom is a nutty left wing activist , her parents are actors. So her having Asbergers makes this political theater literally autistic screeching.
It’s embarrassing to acknowledge this as anything but that.

If she were some sort of ecology science prodigy with actual solutions presented I’d be really interested in what she had to say.

Got it. It's an easy insult but not actually relevant.

She is not a science prodigy but she is an excellent activist who convinced a great many of her schoolmates to protest along side her.
 
I'm not playing your games of misstating what you're replying to in order to shift the question. Re-read what you wrote, re-read what I wrote, and the try again.

I'm not shifting anything. I am biased to the Right when it comes to the environment because the Right is ultimately more mature, sophisticated and nuanced when it comes to talking about issues relating to the environment (and I posted two strong examples of that). The Left, even if they are not being smug, hysterical and alarmist in their approach, end up pushing for more government intervention. There is a reason governments are getting behind Greta Thunberg because she justifies more (and needless) government taxation, growth and intervention. While the government can useful and intervention can be necessary there is a limit to what governments can do and always calling on the government to solve every problem is becoming a major problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Her writing for the BBC and advocating for the education of girls has been public since before she was attacked as evidenced by the fact that "she was writing for the BBC." She was physically attacked, actually they attempted to kill her, because she was advocating for girls education. I'm not seeing the conspiracy.

You act like kids getting help from adults to follow their dreams is bad.. Adults run the world not kids and as a result they are often involved in a child's success. For instance, Taylor Swift wanted to make music and was good at it. She got help from her parents to do so. I'm not sure how that help diminishes Taylor Swifts skills and success though.

My issue with both Taylor Swift and Malala is that they are now nothing more than cogs in a giant marketing machine. Swift and Malala have become images used to sell products to consumers. Maybe there was some genuineness and humanity in what they started doing initially, but those days are long gone for them.
 
Only mention certain countries, seemingly China and India don't exist.
Never mention unsustainable population growth.
Still support the mass migartion of people from the thrid world to the first world where their carbon footprint and energy use will many times greater than what it would be if they stayed put and had less kids.
When it comes to solutions, all roads lead to a higher cost of living, higher taxes and more government control.

But yeah, there is no agenda at all.
1569430846285.jpg
 
My issue with both Taylor Swift and Malala is that they are now nothing more than cogs in a giant marketing machine. Swift and Malala have become images used to sell products to consumers. Maybe there was some genuineness and humanity in what they started doing initially, but those days are long gone for them.

So once an artist or activist attracts a large following they cease to be genuine?
 
So once an artist or activist attracts a large following they cease to be genuine?

When an artist or activist is nothing more than a corporate image created and marketed by a huge PR firm they are not genuine and probably never were. Activism has become very trendy, marketable and profitable these days.
 
You know that 25% of China's electricity is renewable vs 17% from the US right? Let's not pretend that they aren't moving to renewables faster than we are. Also, they are becoming the global hub for the development and manufacture of renewable energy technology.
Let’s not pretend China has the market on the moral compass issues both environmental and animal welfare are concerned.
 
Probably the whole group, I don’t know. Just saying when the kids are in charge whole countries get sued...
We never had kids in charge. Mostly the same people from the 70s/80s is still around.
 
Back
Top