"You clearly took their prediction of the likely outcome (given the world we do live in and the obviously shitty priorities of the powers that be) as an endorsement or acceptance of that outcome, when they did not say anything to indicate that they found it at all acceptable."
"Predicting the most likely outcome of a situation is not at all the same as saying that nothing better than that outcome is possible. ... Pessimism about humanity’s ability to successfully mitigate or overcome the problems of our own making is not the same as saying we shouldn’t try. "
Yeah, you did say those things, but whatever you're already mad about being told that the words you say have effect beyond what you intend, so you're already over that hurdle (hilarious for an "anti-fascist")." Unless, of course, you meant that intentionally dissuading this pessimistic and markedly liberal reading counts as "clearly."
You and the original commenter (along with many other users on this lib site), take offense to this form of criticism because you fundamentally believe that you're only bad if you intend to be actively; which is obviously not the case in a system that both dominates your language and understanding of your own participation in genocide. It's literally beyond you because you would rather maintain your own moral purity than actually behave in a moral way. If you are an "anti-fascist," you should go look up what internalization is and how it happens, and then consider whether you have actually done that work for yourself.
My comment told the original commenter that, whether they intended to or not, their statement (not factual btw, which is the entire problem since, again, this is a social issue more than a technological issue, but whatever), presented a narrative of both the present conditions and future imagination of climate change in a way that is consistent with eco-fascism. I even said that this is apparently unintentional and then illustrated how that specific narrative relates to the ecofascism. It's a common thing liberals resort to because they typically lack the political literacy (or fortitude) to interrogate their own values with the openness to accept when they've reproduced something harmful without intending to.
In five years, there'll be a bunch of dickheads like you two talking about how you've known this all along, I've alreaady seen this a few times in the past decade; maybe you'll be one of them. You're not bad for being socialized to hold internalized values, you are bad for refusing to even consider if you hold them. Fuck off, chud.