I don’t want to inundate this topic with tangential examples but I do want to drive the point home about short term moral virtues with long term societal decay as it is the central premise of my argument. I’ll de-tether this reply from the thread but post it anyway:

Leftist virtue believes that allowing 250 migrants into a free show will enrich the migrants and give them warm fluffy feelings.

Reality: a French cultural theatre faces bankruptcy because the immigrants won’t leave.

What looks good and makes you feel good is not necessarily what is good.

That is a simple equation that progressives and liberals are unable to compute. It is the framework that you can put on every example of their world view.

Imagine giving people that think like that an entire state to control and expecting anything other than destruction and death!

The LA wildfires are literally reaping what they have sown.

@mentORPHEUS Here’s another microcosm of what I’m talking about playing out.

Morally righteous leftist activists curtail the main recruitment pool for the RAF. The leftists believe they are doing the right thing, hell, maybe you think they’re doing the right thing too. Their worldview permits them to:

• Cut off employment for prospective students, engineers, pilots, computer scientists etc

• Deplete the RAF of talented staff, and therefore the RAFs ability to effectively operate.

Well let’s play that out somewhat. With a war in Europe and other potential conflicts breaking out on the horizon it would be very counter intuitive to weaken ourselves in such a way, right? What happens to Britain if they lose air superiority if a conflict was to break out?

What of the leftists that were, as with the LA fires, a secondary cause in the decline of the society that they felt they had the morally correct framework for? They gamble their society on the basis they have saved some irrelevant backwater from being bombed, which itself is a performative abstraction of their ephemeral virtues.

Do we need to speculate who or what the leftists would blame, in lieu of themselves, should this all come to pass?

@MentORPHEUS

There’s two replies to redpillschool’s discussion starter, three including yours. Both I believe contain enough substance to carry on the discussion of the fire in various directions. Again, from a higher resolution.

Do you understand what I’m conveying when I say that there are long term secondary problems that have made for a ruinous society? I really do believe it’s an important point to uncover.

There may be some or even a lot of environmental factors that amplified the seriousness of the fire, but the obvious neglect and incompetence, short sightedness and abdication of responsibility are too stark to ignore in how they have compounded the problems.

It isn’t that they are gay, but their cultural and ideological obsessions about being gay take precedence at every point in decision making.

Again, please attempt to take the abstract from that paragraph as something akin to distraction on a basic level and blameless on a more complicated level. If the people in charge in LA believe they are solely working on the moral framework of being good (DEI), how can they be responsible for anything bad?

Do you see it yet?

@redpillschool I've lived in Los Angeles County all my life and am quite heartily sick of people from different climates smugly and self-righteously assigning blame; second only to the fire-engine-chaser law firms already aggressively advertising for clients to sue "Utilities, government, and anyone else (we can pin blame on in court...)" before the fires are even 50% contained.

I will admit I was disappointed when I first saw the (fat black female) fire chief appear on the screen. However, actually LISTENING to her, I must say she came across as entirely competent for the job, and correctly called out several problems. Namely that in these extreme dry wind conditions after it hasn't rained since last April, wildfires are going to rage. That the City/Mayor cut the fire department budget by around $11 million and forced layoffs of staff like mechanics resulting in over 100 major pieces of fire equipment sitting out of service at any given time. That the fire department isn't the party responsible when no water comes out of the hydrants. That paid fire staff has gotten laid off in favor of inmate labor (which is tantamount to slavery and certain parties are getting RICH off this program.) That while the fire department budget was cut, the police budget was increased at the same time by 10 times the amount cut from fire, in a deliberate F.U. to the Black Lives Matter and Defund the Police movements. That the huge budget increase to the police department hasn't resulted in more officers hired or any measurable decrease in crime.

Los Angeles is built on a literal desert, and could never have grown without importing massive amounts of water from elsewhere. This was literally the plot of the movie Chinatown. Development keeps pushing intto the wild borders of the LA, Riverside, and San Bernardino county urban supersprawl. If you've never been here, you wouldn't likely know the futility of "fuel clearing." During Santa Ana wind conditions, the wind literally blows flames across wide fire breaks and road/railroad right of ways, to directly ignite brush on the far side. This even happens on Interstate highways with a 200 foot plus span of not a single blade of dry grass. Additionally, these winds blow embers that start new spot fires literally miles away from the fire front.

Trump addressed this with a smug and self-righteous "Rake your forests like they do in Finland." This is all kinds of wrong, starting with the fact that Finnish officials pointed out that they never said they rake their forests to Trump, only that they HAVE lots of forested land. Additionally, Finland and frankly most of the rest of the United States has a much different climate than Southern California. It is VERY arid here, literally hasn't rained since last April. During Santa Ana Wind events, the moisture in brush and even living plants drops down into single digit percentages. Bluntly, people who live where it rains 40-80+ inches a year have NOTHING to tell California about fire behavior and control. When it DOES finally rain, the hillsides are prone to massive landslides and mud flows even WITHOUT massive denuding in the name of fire prevention.

One HUGE factor that pundits blaming shit like DEI and Smelt for the lack of water consistently leave out of their dipshit opinions about water in California is The Resnicks. Do even a shallow dive into them and see if your opinions about LOTS of things don't get seriously challenged. This couple has taken control of nearly 60% of water supply and infrastructure in California. They use it for their empire growing snack foods like Pistachios and Almonds in a literal desert. They also take water from distribution systems paid for by tax and rate payers, and SELL IT BACK to water districts and their rate payers! Furthermore, they lobby to keep Iranian sanctions in place so their production of superior pistachios doesn't threaten their market share in America. They are not only Jewish but ardent Zionists who contribute to the Netanyahu regime which has recently taken control of 60% of the water in Syria and actively deprive Palestinians of water... see a pattern here?

About the water drawn from the Sacramento watershed. Even at current levels, human activity already takes so much water from the flow of the mighty Sacramento River (not to mention the Owens which dried up a huge lake and Colorado that sometimes has ZERO flow to the ocean from several states worth of watershed), that salt water intrudes way up the river and water temperatures run too high both of which cause several species of fish populations to crash. It's disingenuous to point to Smelt and Shad and similar "fish that nobody eats" as these are critical parts of the food chain for things like the fish that people DO eat.

Honestly, it's a slave morality to buy into and repeat the notion that "Limitless human growth is GOOD, conservation and austerity and limiting population growth and urban sprawl is BAD/COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST etc. Oil companies themselves knew 50+ years ago that pulling 1/4 of the world's petroleum reserves and burning them into atmospheric CO2 in one human lifetime would alter the very climate of the planet. Yet here we are on track through still unlimited growth to burn most of the remaining 3/4 of it in another human lifetime, and Real Estate continues to dominate the LA economy and expand without limits into territory guaranteed to burn sooner not later- with NO thought to how long humanity can continue on this path. 1 more human lifetime? Two maybe before disasters kill off humans in the literal billions in bad years?