AK_Bell
JWcph, Radicalized By DecencySemi-regularly re-posting this...
Kim Crawley 😷 (she/her)Kim Crawley 😷 (she/her) (@[email protected])
Is anyone here 40 or older and from Turtle Island (the US and Canada) and remember the environmentalism fad of roughly 1988-1991? Environmentalism is very important, but now I know the powers-that-be were trying to make environmental destruction the responsibility of proletariat individuals to solve. Reduce, reuse, recycle! https://helvede.net/@jwcph/116116331432711304
cwicseolfor@jwcph Prosecution and future taxation is the *favorable* outcome for them.
jonathankoren™
Eli the Bearded
Natsura 
Longspeak
Mark Connolly 🍻 🚴🏼♀️ (he, him, his)
Eric Goodwin
Davey 
the 1998 Sega Saturn RPG, Baroque 🔞@jwcph this sort of shit is why the death note needs to be real
PeachMcD
StarkRG
MegatronicThronBanksA handful of drones.... a handful of drones.....
Nyx Allocer@jwcph I saw someone who said "People who fly frequently are helping to cook the planet" and its like no, people with Private Jets™ that's got frequently are helping cook the planet
Pent Up Games 🔞@jwcph Okay but now I'm wondering if this person comes from somewhere with really small Greyhound buses that only seat 30 people?
eribosot@jwcph Putting the blame for destroying the planet exclusively on oil executives is like putting the blame for the excess of superhero movies exclusively on Marvel Studios. It takes two to tango, and too many of us are only too willing to dance.
Blackoverflow@eribosot
@jwcph
Do you think that people always have the capacity of choice?
Would you agree, that the amount of blame should correlate with how much capacity they had to choose?
I do agree with you, that blaming those billionaires does not free the rest of us from blame.
At the same time I agree with this thread, that these people are clearly and freely choosing evil. So they deserve mounts of blaim.
I find the question of who's to blame much less interesting or important than fixing the problem. Yes, they are vastly more to blame than we are. But blaming them -or ourselves- does nothing to fix the problem.
The mindset I see is one of good and evil, or sin and redemption. But when a house is on fire, you first grab a bucket and put out the fire, and only later figure out who was the arsonist.
@eribosot @blackoverflow Oh, fuck off.
Leendaal@eribosot @blackoverflow @jwcph to stay in your image the arsonist hasn't left the scene and is pouring gasoline on the house with a fire hose while you have a bucket.
@Leendaal @blackoverflow @jwcph
That's a great point, but to stretch the analogy even further, where does the arsonist get his unlimited supply of gasoline? On the one hand, I have a bucket in my hand, and on the other hand, I just gave him that gasoline earlier in the day.
In literal terms, isn't the oil executive's wealth and power inextricably linked to my carbon footprint?
@eribosot @blackoverflow @jwcph thats what BP thought was a good deflection strategy. Any more oil industry talking points? Maybe the bucket you talk about IS not filled with water as you think.
@eribosot
Did you freely choose to give him the gasoline?
What (better) options did you have?
"Just, like, don't drive!" is a shitty previleged answer.
If you don't have a better answer, collective action, up to revolt, is the best we have.
Not a good answer, but the best we have.
Related: Carbon Handprint
https://www.canburypress.com/products/the-climate-handprint-by-gabriel-baunach-isbn-9781914487613
@blackoverflow Thanks for the book recommendation! I'll check it out.
I get that the snarky "You're against climate change, yet you still fly, interesting" bullshit is not a valid argument.
As for collective action, I have a question: Do you feel that mass protests would be more effective than voting green politicians into office, or vice versa? I don't mean it as a rhetorical question; I really want to hear your answer, and why.
Raphael@blackoverflow @eribosot Ressource-constrained people have little choice about many things, true. However, when given a choice, how do they act?
Badly, most of us, most of the time.
Latest experiment at scale: GenAI. Nobody had to start using ChatGPT. _Nobody._ And yet here we are.
The "global north" societies are so complicit in global-scale extraction and exploitation it's hard to comprehend. You yelling at billionairs? Imagine what a random person from the "global south" has to say to you or me. An extremely humbling experience that would be, by me estimate.
@blackoverflow is right that the use of fossil fuels is so ingrained in the global north that it's impossible to avoid. I think it's both unfair and counterproductive to self-flagellate about it.
My take: the only people with the actual power to stop this are politicians, who can be pressured through protests, activism and elections to change things.
Importantly, "buying green" won't cut it. That just makes non-green items cheaper thanks to the iron law of supply and demand.
@eribosot @blackoverflow Closer!
On average, we don't vote for those politicians.
On average, we buy cheap, not sustainable.
That's on us.
More people buying green increases demand, driving up the price. So if people sacrifice their money to buy sustainable, not cheap, that makes things worse, not better. That's not on us; it's just market forces.
The choice should not be between cheap or sustainable: sustainable should be the cheaper option. Only regulation fixes this. Fossil fuel-heavy options should be taxed or banned. My city bans diesel vehicles and fossil advertising (cars, flights, cruises).
@eribosot @blackoverflow Buying _less_ is not an option, hm?
Where possible, sure.
I personally don't drive a car, rarely fly and don't eat meat. I'm also generally not very consumerist. I recently replaced my iPhone --after 9 years. I very rarely buy new clothes, or any material items, really.
But I also think it's unrealistic to expect everyone to behave that way. People are just different, and framing the fight against climate change as a holier-than-thou competition just pits people against each other.
On market effects:
"Higher demand drives higher prices" holds only true for static supply.
So, in the short term or if the supply is not increased.
Market theory predicts long term:
Higher demand leads to higher competition and higher supply. Economics of scale lead to lower prices.
And market reality is way more complex...
Any viewpoint that promotes action is good and any viewpoint that promotes stagnation is bad.
Making people responsible for choices that they see out of their control promotes resignation.
Seeing the responsibility to act on some other entity (e.g. politicians) promotes stagnation.
Demanding change is action.
Protest is action.
Anger leads to action.
The important thing is that we encourage action on any level.
Self care, consume, protest, community work. Anything!
Does running for office on a green platform promote action, or stagnation?
Does becoming a climate scientist promote action, or stagnation?
Taking up such role is most likely an action to create change. So yes.
Most important is how the person acts in these roles.
The person may become a role model for action and change a lot directly and indirectly.
When a person has the option to do so, that's great!
A person that does not have these options may do other valuable things and is not less for it.
The people with smallest capacity to choose, that are still fighting to do good, are the bravest.
@eribosot
@jwcph
And to fix the problem, it needs avenues of action.
Actions that can't happen without the capacity to choose.
Individual action will not fix this problem.
For collective action to happen, the collective needs to join behind a common goal.
For this to happen, it needs voices of anger and discontent. It also needs blame, to put pressure on those who have the capacity to choose.
Unrest is a social function which has it's function.
It is dangerous, but also needed.
Or, to use your image:
"Hey everyone, help! Jeff is setting our home on fire! What the fuck! We need to act now!"
No one is hoping that the climate is fixed when these people are stopped.
They need to be stopped, so they don't continue to make it worse.
And we need to make it clear, that we don't tolerate these evil actions.
Cassandrich@jwcph And several times a year a large portion of them are all in one place.
kolya
Autumn Meadow@jwcph
Speed was a great film, by the way. I'm not at all suggesting anyone do to those busses what David Hopper did. That would be wildly irresponsible. So let's not do that.
Speed was a great film, by the way. I'm not at all suggesting anyone do to those busses what David Hopper did. That would be wildly irresponsible. So let's not do that.
Colin@jwcph @creideiki power abhors a vacuum. Without solving the wealth and income inequality issues, these stooges’ families and estates and companies will just keep persisting it.
Julian West🦞@jwcph yes, but most of us are helping them
Maximilian Overdraft, Esq.@jwcph
Inspired: working to change the systems these folks and their cut-outs control, so that they produce positive outcomes, regardless of who's controlling the levers of power
Inspired: working to change the systems these folks and their cut-outs control, so that they produce positive outcomes, regardless of who's controlling the levers of power
DoomsdaysCW
Passageiro clandestino@jwcph and AI techbros
Lesbitarian Party@jwcph We gonna repost <3