SamuelGabrielSG on Nostr: Where Are the Climate Advocates When Electric Cars Burn? ...
Where Are the Climate Advocates When Electric Cars Burn?
In a world where every carbon footprint is scrutinized, where we’re told the planet hangs in the balance and every action matters, the silence surrounding the destruction of electric vehicles—particularly Teslas—is deafening.
If climate change is truly the existential threat activists claim it is, and electric vehicles are one of the primary solutions offered to combat it, then why are we not seeing prominent climate voices condemn the public destruction of these cars?
We’ve seen multiple videos surface in recent months of Teslas being set ablaze, vandalized, or ridiculed as symbols of tech elitism. Sometimes it’s political protesters making a statement. Other times, it’s radical environmentalists claiming they oppose the materials or corporations behind the vehicles. Yet what’s conspicuously absent is any meaningful outcry from figures like Greta Thunberg or major climate organizations.
Where are the passionate tweets? The stern-faced condemnations? The grassroots campaigns to protect the very technology they once claimed would save the planet?
It’s not as if the message was unclear in years past. We were told that electric vehicles would reduce emissions, cut dependence on fossil fuels, and represent the future of clean transportation. People were encouraged—shamed, even—into trading in their gas-powered cars for EVs. Governments subsidized it. Activists marched for it. Schools taught it.
But now, when these vehicles are being targeted and destroyed in broad daylight, the silence from the movement is revealing.
This raises uncomfortable questions. Was the goal ever really about solving climate change? Or was it about controlling narratives, promoting certain ideologies, or aligning with specific corporate interests? If climate change were truly the crisis it’s made out to be, logic would demand outrage over the destruction of anything that lowers carbon emissions—even if it bears a Tesla logo.
Instead, we see selective outrage. Destruction is ignored when it’s politically convenient. The narrative shifts, and with it, the supposed urgency of “saving the planet” takes a back seat.
This kind of inconsistency weakens the credibility of the entire movement. It makes it appear less about science and more about theater. Less about saving the Earth, more about wielding moral superiority.
If electric cars being torched in the streets doesn’t warrant a reaction from those who claim to champion the environment, perhaps it's time we reconsider the nature of their campaign. Was it about climate all along—or just another ideological crusade in disguise?
In a world where every carbon footprint is scrutinized, where we’re told the planet hangs in the balance and every action matters, the silence surrounding the destruction of electric vehicles—particularly Teslas—is deafening.
If climate change is truly the existential threat activists claim it is, and electric vehicles are one of the primary solutions offered to combat it, then why are we not seeing prominent climate voices condemn the public destruction of these cars?
We’ve seen multiple videos surface in recent months of Teslas being set ablaze, vandalized, or ridiculed as symbols of tech elitism. Sometimes it’s political protesters making a statement. Other times, it’s radical environmentalists claiming they oppose the materials or corporations behind the vehicles. Yet what’s conspicuously absent is any meaningful outcry from figures like Greta Thunberg or major climate organizations.
Where are the passionate tweets? The stern-faced condemnations? The grassroots campaigns to protect the very technology they once claimed would save the planet?
It’s not as if the message was unclear in years past. We were told that electric vehicles would reduce emissions, cut dependence on fossil fuels, and represent the future of clean transportation. People were encouraged—shamed, even—into trading in their gas-powered cars for EVs. Governments subsidized it. Activists marched for it. Schools taught it.
But now, when these vehicles are being targeted and destroyed in broad daylight, the silence from the movement is revealing.
This raises uncomfortable questions. Was the goal ever really about solving climate change? Or was it about controlling narratives, promoting certain ideologies, or aligning with specific corporate interests? If climate change were truly the crisis it’s made out to be, logic would demand outrage over the destruction of anything that lowers carbon emissions—even if it bears a Tesla logo.
Instead, we see selective outrage. Destruction is ignored when it’s politically convenient. The narrative shifts, and with it, the supposed urgency of “saving the planet” takes a back seat.
This kind of inconsistency weakens the credibility of the entire movement. It makes it appear less about science and more about theater. Less about saving the Earth, more about wielding moral superiority.
If electric cars being torched in the streets doesn’t warrant a reaction from those who claim to champion the environment, perhaps it's time we reconsider the nature of their campaign. Was it about climate all along—or just another ideological crusade in disguise?