No snowflake ever feels responsible for the avalanche.
People in general act in their own self interest, and have trouble seeing the wider influence of their decisions.
That’s why good government is so important, because establishing rules and regulations should be a dedicated job done by people committed to seeing the big picture.
I’m tired of hearing that “the people” are responsible.
Companies are responsible. You walk into a grocery store and 90% of the products are packaged in plastics. Most of the products are not produced in a sustainable way. But it’s the only options we have. Most people want to help the planet, but don’t have the option.
And no matter who anyone votes for, governments around the world are too concerned with the economy (read: helping companies make more money) to take any real concrete action and implement laws to help the environment.
I stopped taking my private jet for trips under 1 hour and instructed the staff not to use air conditioning on the yachts unless notified I’ll be there 8 hours in advance.
Not everyone has options, but a lot of people likely have more options than they think they do.
Especially when it comes to meat. Very few people live in a place or situation where they “must” get their protein or certain vitamins exclusively from meat.
Yes we can all do our own collective part with our individual choices. We can all make sacrifices. Cut down on luxuries and comforts and what have you.
But what is the fucking point when you have millionaires and billionaires and companies who are responsible for the vast majority of the environmental disaster that’s happening right now? And government who enable them? They’re not making any fucking sacrifice.
And, as I said, they’re the ones providing us with all the plastic wrapped, pfas-filled, and unsustainable products that we need to survive. We often have no choice, but to buy these products because that’s all that’s available. What do we do then?
All the sacrifices we make gives them more room to pollute even more to cut costs anyway.
We often have no choice, but to buy these products because that’s all that’s available.
This is the point that I’m arguing, which seems to be the foundation of your defeatist stance.
Companies have money because we give them money. Companies are allowed to pollute because we don’t really care that they do. Otherwise, we’d be voting differently, protesting differently, and so on.
I’m suggesting that it’s not often that we have no choice. Most of us have plenty of choices with each product we buy. But we’ll often buy the disposable one made in China because it’s 20% cheaper than one made more sustainably, for instance.
With the way people are strapped for cash in this economy, we don’t have a choice.
You think I want to buy fruits and vegetables that came all the way from Chile during the winter time because they don’t grow here in Canada under the snow?
You want me to eat less meat? Ok. But that bloc of tofu was produced in China and came all the way here on a big container boat.
Yes I want to buy that local handmade sweater, but it’s 200$. Walmart has sweaters made in Bangladesh for 1/10th of that price and I need to pay my increasingly high rent.
We’re being strangled financially and forced to make these choices.
You think I want to buy fruits and vegetables that came all the way from Chile during the winter time because they don’t grow here in Canada under the snow?
Guess Canada was unpopulated before it could trade with Chile…or maybe what was grown and eaten in Canada centuries ago might still be grown there?
Yes, things are expensive. I’m not saying the choices are always easy to make. But I am saying that a defeatist attitude is generally just a way of saying “It’s too hard and I don’t wanna”. And if someone doesn’t wanna, that’s fine. There are options, and it’s not all black and white.
Why do you need a new handmade sweater? First of all, how often do you buy sweaters? They usually last years. Second of all, buying one used is more environmentally friendly than buying a brand new one.
Why are you buying the Tofu from China? This is a product of Canada. And even if it’s coming from elsewhere, reducing meat consumption likely outweighs the impacts of shipping. And hey, Canada can likely grown and produce its own legumes!
Again, I’m not saying the choices are easy, clear, obvious, or intuitive. I’m saying they’re probably there for most people.
“For the people, by the people” has morphed into “For the corporations, by the corporations” in this dystopian timeline I don’t want to be a part of anymore.
I think a more useful way to look at it is that the government represents the people who control more resources. If we assume that, then democracy has to extend beyond the voting booth, into the realm of resource surplus accumulation and distribution. Ultimately it’s in the hands of labor. If labor doesn’t allow for few to accumulate and control most of the surplus, then that surplus will be spread out among more people and thus the government would represent a wider group of people. Unionize, take the surplus and force the government to represent your unions. This is actionable.
All governance is based on balances of power, both real and perceived. Only by empowering and acknowledging the power of the people can democracy truly flourish.
No snowflake ever feels responsible for the avalanche.
People in general act in their own self interest, and have trouble seeing the wider influence of their decisions.
That’s why good government is so important, because establishing rules and regulations should be a dedicated job done by people committed to seeing the big picture.
But that ain’t the government we got.
I’m tired of hearing that “the people” are responsible.
Companies are responsible. You walk into a grocery store and 90% of the products are packaged in plastics. Most of the products are not produced in a sustainable way. But it’s the only options we have. Most people want to help the planet, but don’t have the option.
And no matter who anyone votes for, governments around the world are too concerned with the economy (read: helping companies make more money) to take any real concrete action and implement laws to help the environment.
I stopped taking my private jet for trips under 1 hour and instructed the staff not to use air conditioning on the yachts unless notified I’ll be there 8 hours in advance.
No need to thank me. We all have to do our part.
Gaia appreciates your sacrifice.
Companies won’t do anything unprofitable without being forced.
Not everyone has options, but a lot of people likely have more options than they think they do.
Especially when it comes to meat. Very few people live in a place or situation where they “must” get their protein or certain vitamins exclusively from meat.
I think you misunderstood what I meant.
Yes we can all do our own collective part with our individual choices. We can all make sacrifices. Cut down on luxuries and comforts and what have you.
But what is the fucking point when you have millionaires and billionaires and companies who are responsible for the vast majority of the environmental disaster that’s happening right now? And government who enable them? They’re not making any fucking sacrifice.
And, as I said, they’re the ones providing us with all the plastic wrapped, pfas-filled, and unsustainable products that we need to survive. We often have no choice, but to buy these products because that’s all that’s available. What do we do then?
All the sacrifices we make gives them more room to pollute even more to cut costs anyway.
This is the point that I’m arguing, which seems to be the foundation of your defeatist stance.
Companies have money because we give them money. Companies are allowed to pollute because we don’t really care that they do. Otherwise, we’d be voting differently, protesting differently, and so on.
I’m suggesting that it’s not often that we have no choice. Most of us have plenty of choices with each product we buy. But we’ll often buy the disposable one made in China because it’s 20% cheaper than one made more sustainably, for instance.
With the way people are strapped for cash in this economy, we don’t have a choice.
You think I want to buy fruits and vegetables that came all the way from Chile during the winter time because they don’t grow here in Canada under the snow?
You want me to eat less meat? Ok. But that bloc of tofu was produced in China and came all the way here on a big container boat.
Yes I want to buy that local handmade sweater, but it’s 200$. Walmart has sweaters made in Bangladesh for 1/10th of that price and I need to pay my increasingly high rent.
We’re being strangled financially and forced to make these choices.
Guess Canada was unpopulated before it could trade with Chile…or maybe what was grown and eaten in Canada centuries ago might still be grown there?
Yes, things are expensive. I’m not saying the choices are always easy to make. But I am saying that a defeatist attitude is generally just a way of saying “It’s too hard and I don’t wanna”. And if someone doesn’t wanna, that’s fine. There are options, and it’s not all black and white.
Why do you need a new handmade sweater? First of all, how often do you buy sweaters? They usually last years. Second of all, buying one used is more environmentally friendly than buying a brand new one.
Why are you buying the Tofu from China? This is a product of Canada. And even if it’s coming from elsewhere, reducing meat consumption likely outweighs the impacts of shipping. And hey, Canada can likely grown and produce its own legumes!
Again, I’m not saying the choices are easy, clear, obvious, or intuitive. I’m saying they’re probably there for most people.
“For the people, by the people” has morphed into “For the corporations, by the corporations” in this dystopian timeline I don’t want to be a part of anymore.
Always has been. Men only, property owners, 3/5ths and all that.
I think a more useful way to look at it is that the government represents the people who control more resources. If we assume that, then democracy has to extend beyond the voting booth, into the realm of resource surplus accumulation and distribution. Ultimately it’s in the hands of labor. If labor doesn’t allow for few to accumulate and control most of the surplus, then that surplus will be spread out among more people and thus the government would represent a wider group of people. Unionize, take the surplus and force the government to represent your unions. This is actionable.
All governance is based on balances of power, both real and perceived. Only by empowering and acknowledging the power of the people can democracy truly flourish.
I want proof that a ban on animal products will be first rolled out on the super wealthy and then on the rest of us