[foldr]

Again, you're suggesting an equivalence between someone who has strong views and someone who's simply disconnected from reality. Thunberg is right to be concerned about the environment. You could argue that she's too concerned (maybe). Thiel is not right to be worried about the antichrist and Armageddon.

We don't need to find some kind of mythical middle ground between people who are too worried about the antichrist and people who aren't sufficiently worried about the antichrist. Rather, we should just set eschatological eccentrics aside when it comes to orienting our political outlook.

[dgxyz]

It’s not the environmental campaigning that’s the issue. I am very much aligned with that. In fact I’ve done a fair bit of that myself and you’ll occasionally find me at demonstrations. I think most people are well aligned with that.

It’s the deep dive into geopolitics which is now being used to discredit her that is the problem. There’s things you don’t touch with a pole and she’s been all over them. That’s why the media have shut up about her. There isn’t universal support or consensus there. She did a lot of damage to the environmental cause getting involved.

That makes her a pariah on all causes.

The mid ground is a rational scientific approach and consistent pressure and staying within the rails that are your primary cause.

[jacquesm]

> She did a lot of damage to the environmental cause getting involved.

No she didn't. She pointed out there is hypocrisy on both sides of these arguments. Environmental causes are not immune to being hijacked and there has been plenty of that.