For now. Give it a few decades when the effects of climate change start forcing people out of their homes, cause widespread crop failure, kill thousands with heatwaves and storms, etc.

If you're choice is between

losing your home, starving to death, or in some way dying in the streets

losing your home, starving to death, or in some way dying in the streets after holding those responsible to account a la the adjuster

More and more people will choose option 2.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're more likely to die in a heat wave in prison right now.

IDK maybe that's more reason to fight, just to the death.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

For now that's the case. But if there ever becomes a time when life outside of prison means starving to death, dying in a heat wave or storm, it won't matter.

People still have things to lose. But people are losing things.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I mean even thinking that that'd be the actual situation for me where I live in few decades vs. spending those few decades and rest of my life in American prison, it's going to be a very easy decision for me

I mean, come on. Uncertain future some decades ago vs the certainty that I'm rotting in an American prison for the rest of my life starting now. Easiest decision of my life

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It very well could be the rest of your life in both cases.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yes and that still gives me some decades before something might happen vs spending those decades and the rest of my life in American prison. I mean have you really considered the options here lol

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think you've misunderstood. I'm talking about the choice that people make when these effects start happening, not a choice now. Of course most people aren't opting to get violent yet, there backs aren't yet against the wall.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In that case I wouldn't worry about either choice if it's decades away. I'd wait and see how bad it gets before making the decision.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sure. But my whole point is that we're headed in that direction.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

We are. But it's just American prisons are so horrific that you'll really want to wait and see how bad it gets before choosing to put yourself in one.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Plus the two aren't mutually exclusive. You could just as easily go to prison and then just be abandoned there once the climate becomes uninhabitable anyway. Wouldn't be the first time:

Back in 2005, when Katrina hit New Orleans, prison guards abandoned prisoners in locked cells as the floodwaters rose chest-high. Several thousand of those inmates were eventually rescued, but then miserably housed on a broken piece of interstate, directly exposed to the Southern summer sun.

[–] SinAdjetivos@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago

International history is filled with examples like this. The history of the Russian gulags is probably the most stark example, they were actually pretty decent (comparably) before everything outside went to shit...