You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
11 points
2 points
*

But who else is to blame? Seriously…

Where do you think these 57 companies get their money from to continue doing their shit? By individuals buying their shit.

What do you think these 57 companies consist of? They employ hundreds of thousands of individuals. Each of which could theoretically decide not to continue with that.

Of course I realize it’s not that easy, individual situations may be complex, and that there’s different amounts of blame to go around. You’re correct, these companies have concentrated blame to them and it’d be more impactful to regulate them specifically.

But my statement is simply also true. Multiple things can be true at the same time. Multiple courses of action can be reasonable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

People need to stop buying animal products and demand our politicians invest in renewables and public transit.

Too many people have protested against bike lanes and apartment buildings when those are much better for the environment. So yeah let’s not the individuals off the hook completely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There is no “hook” though. We shouldn’t be fighting against each other.

Every person has a different level of personal sacrifice for the greater good that they are ok with. It is completely fine to be selfish. If that means that we’re fucked as a species, then that’s what that means.

If we militantly blame people for still eating animal products for example, it’ll just create hostilities that are further entrenching the sides. Instead we need to push to compromises, everywhere. Make animal products more expensive, using the tax or whatever to offset their carbon impact. People that still want to buy it can buy it. Or say it’d be best to not eat animal products, but if that’s too hard, how about just a little less, however much is acceptable.

It’s not optimal, absolutely true, but it has a much higher chance of working.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Multiple things can be true at the same time. Multiple courses of action can be reasonable.

Of course. And your original statement was only placing blame on individuals, which is the type of attitude that helps these companies get away with the all the environmental damage they cause. 80% of the cause should also be 80% of the focus.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

People continue to use the big 6 banks that finance the fossil fuel industry when they could switch to credit unions instead.

https://bank.green/

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

No, it was not only placing blame on individuals. That is your interpretation of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Canada

!canada@lemmy.ca

Create post

What’s going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


Community stats

  • 7K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.1K

    Posts

  • 37K

    Comments