summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJoe Carstairs <me@joeac.net>2026-08-04 16:33:34 +0100
committerJoe Carstairs <me@joeac.net>2026-08-04 16:33:34 +0100
commita7792328749be53bba33d978eb13ff4e2cd774ea (patch)
tree7d544332c450a1f81a35ba8bdeef30bbf40835b5
parent2269989bc0f3ea7a1bc7846019f972a61cec7ab4 (diff)
chp5: reword millenialist regret
-rw-r--r--chapter5.md6
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/chapter5.md b/chapter5.md
index 0f7b83d..7d5fc03 100644
--- a/chapter5.md
+++ b/chapter5.md
@@ -33,8 +33,10 @@ have I proposed any practical plan of action which could lead green rhetors to
change their literary style in the ways I prefer. I have also mostly assumed
that green rhetoric is only addressed to people who do not hold millenialist
worldviews, and this is of course untrue. Many people with a huge stake in green
-issues, from the Appalachians to the Congo, hold millenialist worldviews. My
-analysis is significantly weaker for having largely ignored these people.
+issues, from the Appalachians to the Congo, hold millenialist worldviews, and
+they may receive green apocalypticism very differently to people who don't have
+such outlooks. My analysis is significantly weaker for having largely ignored
+millenialist people.
What I do claim, is that, contra the many critics of apocalypticism, and
despite the fact that apocalypticism, like all good things, can and is twisted