Because I don't trust anybody who tells me things I wanna hear like "you bear no responsibility; it's somebody else's fault".
Oil companies couldn't sell if nobody was buying. The idea that the world can be fixed and I won't need to sacrifice a thing is a little too good to be true. Sure, maybe others will need to make more changes than me, and I'm certainly not gonna let them off the hook, but I'm not gonna let myself off the hook either, and anyone who tells me I can is selling me something.
Most of the factories that manufacture the stuff you use are driven by fossil fuels. The food you eat is most likely grown using fertilizer that was made using natural gas. Unless you live in the forest and eat nuts and berries, you use fossil fuels.
"Popular superheroes are popular" isn't a deep revelation. People will still flock to see the next Batman movie, too. Deadpool & Wolverine did gangbusters. So did GOTG3. If Tony Stark hadn't died, an Iron Man 4 right about now would do insane business. And I suspect that if Marvel had successfully rebooted Blade, that movie would do insane business too.
The main thing I'm surprised by is how Marvel has never attempted to make an MCU Daredevil movie, as it seems to me that it'd be an easy sell. He's their most currently popular character that they've never done a movie for (in the MCU at least).
Zimbabwe can tax the profits from mining AND the profits from processing. Additionally, doing it locally means that Zimbabwean workers get the work, and that the knowhow for doing it becomes local knowledge. Furthermore, this is merely a stepping stone, as Zimbabwe plans to develop a domestic industry for manufacturing batteries with this processed lithium. If you've ever seen Rules for Rulers by CGP Grey, you'll be familiar with the concept that the more a national economy depends on raw resources, the more prone it is to exploitation and oppression, whereas the more a national economy depends on advanced manufacturing, the harder it is for a dictator to exploit, since it means national prosperity depends on a highly-educated workforce, which is antithetical to how brutal dictatorships work.
This isn't a Chinese initiative. Zimbabwe has banned the export of raw lithium, meaning that Chinese companies were forced to move processing here. There's no doubt that China wants to exploit Africa as much as it can, but Zimbabwe at least has figured out how to prevent itself from getting completely taken advantage of, and is leveraging its position to turn itself into a more advanced economy.
TBH anyone who thinks that our natural state is calm civility and love has never had to take care of a young child for any significant amount of time. "How dare you touch my toys, regardless of whether I was playing with them" is a universal stage that everyone goes through and that has to be corrected lest the child NEVER outgrow it.
DS9 is probably the best-written Star Trek show, but what worries me is how many of its fans think that Sisko's war crimes are "badass" and that his worldview should be emulated. Many DS9 fans seem to think that the show's shades of grey renders the Roddenberry vision on display in TOS and TNG invalid - dismissing it with "it's easy to be a saint in paradise".
There are a lot of things to criticize with Discovery, but what it absolutely nailed was the Lorca twist. Lorca arguing about how rules are made to be broken, sometimes you gotta commit a war crime or two, and "context is for kings", was a perfect summation of the mindset of these kinds of Trek fans. So when it was revealed that he was actually from the universe where humanity had given in to this mentality and thus failed to create the Federation, that was the perfect "sci-fi twist" that Star Trek excels in.
I don't disagree; I'm just pointing out that the judge was unlikely to be targeting the barrister for any political reason. Courts always discourage any overly obvious suggestion of jury nullification, regardless of the case being tried or whether it does or does not relate to Israel.
Zimbabwe was already mining the lithium, so the environmental damage was already happening. What's new here is that it's now processing it locally. This means Zimbabwe gets a bigger percentage of the money that's made from this lithium. A nation's resources should be profitable primarily to itself.
Additionally, exporting for processing is more environmentally damaging than doing it locally because when you export, then in addition to whatever damage is done by processing, you also get all the environmental damage that comes from all that transportation. Eliminating the transportation at least removes one unnecessary element of environmental damage in an industrial chain that would exist one way or the other.
With an argument like that, it sounds like you have a lot of contempt for the court system. So if the barrister also argued in open court that "ignoring all law and evidence is the right thing to do"...
Whoever said "instead"?