Sltldr: “They’re just throwing away money, planting trees in the desert for them to die.”

The Great Green Wall is a top down, big government intervention that has little to no local buy-in and isn’t sustainable without continued big government funding.

Not surprisingly, the funding has mostly dried up, and so has the land.

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
      93·
      3 months ago

      > “alt tl;dr”

      > proceeds to say nothing in the actual article that doesn’t mention executive salaries or China

      Tankies really love to just say shit, don’t they?

      You can read about it here (open-access) if you don’t want to listen to someone make shit up about an article and instead read about the good things China’s initiative is doing.

      Edit: Answering marxismtomorrow’s very serious and not-at-all-ableist question below: I’m autistic. This is devastating to my case, and I formally retract all the arguments I’ve made here in light of this grievous oversight on my part.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
          53·
          3 months ago

          Reminding people that this method DOES IN FACT WORK, when the article heavily suggests it is the method, not the people performing the method, that is the problem seems valuable to me.

          Oh, so you just don’t know or care what a “TL;DR” is. Very cool. (It’s a summary, by the way.) Above, I’ve provided an open-access article highlighting the accomplishments (I’m not saying that snarkily like in scare quotes) of China’s GGW initiative.

            • caurvo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              2·
              3 months ago

              Alternative summary feels intentionally misleading, when it’s clear your intention was not to summarise but start a discussion on a related tangent (which is appreciated).

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
              43·
              3 months ago

              …Yes, I provided an alternative summary.

              Oh, yeah, I remember the time someone provided a summary of Tom Sawyer, and when I thought it was lacking, I gave an “alternative summary” which was a crappy, nakedly biased opinion of elements not even in the book and mostly focused on how Huckleberry Finn is a way better character in his book. That’s how summaries work.

                • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  42·
                  3 months ago

                  If you don’t understand direct on topic comparisons just say so.

                  Do I need to point you to an actual definition of a “summary”? I’ve been chalking it up to tankie bad-faith, but at this point, I’m wondering if it’s just aggressive tankie stupidity.

                  “With the additional information?” Okay, I’m back to assuming bad-faith over illiteracy. Motherfucker, 1) that’s outside the boundaries of a summary, and more importantly 2) none of what you said is in the article. Like that’s not a summary. That’s not even an analysis. A “TL;DR” isn’t “here’s my shitty opinion on this topic not at all explored in the article.”