For me, when the disagreement is about turning the planet into a hollow cinder for naked protection of wealth accrued in an unjust system and justified by Puritanical memes of free will and individualism, it's either a naughty word ascribing malice or one ascribing stupidity.
There is disagreement about the magnitude of things, but this is hyperboloic.
> for naked protection of wealth
An opinion on their motives.
> accrued in an unjust system
There's so much that can be discussed there. But simple, name one system that isn't unjust in some way. You can optimize for advancement though capitalism, or you can optimize for equality though communism, or some variation thereof. If you optimize too much for capitalism, the lower class are left out, if you optimize too much for communism, after a while everyone is lower than the lower class in what capitalism would result in. Different people will view the right balance differently, so "just" has no meaning here.
> it's either a naughty word ascribing malice or one ascribing stupidity
Or a bit of humility in assuming that you don't know every single thing there is to know about economics, sociology, political theory, and the motives of other individuals.
To be clear, I probably have similar views and beliefs to you on all these topics, but where we differ is in my willingness to put my views forth as fact and condemn others on limited evidence, public relations pieces put out by them and others, and my views on soft sciences that are still very much being worked on and in flux. Thinking someone else is an asshole is not an excuse for adopting bad behavior youself.
>There is disagreement about the magnitude of things, but this is hyperboloic (sic)
It's not hyperbolic. The Earth's new homeostasis after an unchecked greenhouse effect has run its course looks like Venus. If the effect is not stopped the question is not whether this will happen but how long it will take. Quite a while, certainly, but the environment will become inimical to humans much sooner.
