🍼🌍The Green Party wants to save the planet—just not quite enough to question the sacred institution of having tiny carbon super-emitters in prams. Climate radicalism? Absolutely. Ban cars, ground planes, kill burgers. But dare whisper that maybe, just maybe, a Prius-driving vegan couple should think twice about birthing a carbon footprint the size of a small nation, and suddenly you’re a monster.
🤫 The Last Taboo of the Climate-Obsessed Left
It’s the elephant in the solar-paneled room: creating a new human in a high-consumption society is the single most carbon-intensive act most people will ever undertake. But does the Green Party talk about it? Absolutely not. Because nothing screams “serious about climate” like avoiding the one decision that outweighs all others combined.
The same party that lectures you about radiator settings and oat milk has no problem with each member producing a 70-year carbon commitment in nappies. Let’s be honest: it’s not environmentalism, it’s environmental cosplay. 🌎🎭
We’re not calling for handmaid’s tale-style breeding bans. Just honesty. If Greens are going to sermonize about climate catastrophe, they should be able to admit that choosing not to reproduce is actually greener than alphabetizing your recycling bin or cycling to work in the rain.
And before someone shouts “population control!”, let’s get real: this isn’t about babies in low-income countries. It’s the Waitrose kids with iPads, Disney+ subscriptions, and holidays in Tuscany that are guzzling the planet’s remaining lifelines. ☠️✈️
The climate doesn’t care about your electoral anxiety. It cares about math. And the math says: babies = emissions. But hey, why let science get in the way of your eco-brand identity?
🔥 Challenges 🔥
Why is this the line Greens won’t cross? Is it really compassion, or cowardice? Comment below with your hottest take, your snarkiest one-liner, or your personal story. Should climate radicals actually be… radical?
Chameleon Magazine 
Leave a comment