[Thread] If there's one thing that frustrates me about the green movement it's infighting. It takes a huge conscious effort not to be drawn into wasting time arguing about things like what to call something. 1/9 https://twitter.com/leeinthelakes/status/1380415422504271872

It is often worthwhile to debate the best approach on a given topic, and science comparing different approaches is usually useful to allow us to ensure we're getting the most benefit out of an opportunity for nature recovery. 2/9

However, it's rarely worthwhile to argue about things like semantics. It's NEVER worth arguing about whether one person's warm-hearted effort or contribution is enough or better or worse than someone else's effort. 3/9

The worst thing about infighting isn't the time and energy it wastes. It's the foothold it gives critics or sceptics. I mean, if WE can't even come together to support something, how can others be convinced to get on board? 4/9

Infighting criticisms are often capitalised on by others who want to discredit an entire approach or ignore an issue. 5/9

E.g. a sceptic sees conservationists arguing over whether planting a wildflower meadow qualifies as rewilding. Some comments could be taken to imply that it's not worthwhile or backed as an approach which allows them an excuse not to bother. 6/9

There is a huge difference between an argument about defining a word or an argument about whether someone's effort is "enough" and a supportive, friendly acknowledgement that as well as this fantastic thing, more is needed. 7/9

We are in the midst of a climate disaster. Do you think people on the Titanic argued about what the life jackets should be called? Do you think they berated people's small efforts to promote survival? 8/9

We need to come together and create a friendly, supportive community that focuses time and effort on furthering the cause as a whole, rather than picking apart small elements of it. We will never obtain perfection, let's stop chasing it and get on with making things happen 9/9