Don’t do this, but remember: the richer a person is, the bigger the ecological footprint. You are higher on that list than you might realize. Especially ecofascists tend to forget that fact.
Yeah - everyone is shitting on the top 1% here in Germany until they realize that half the population here makes it into that percentile and suddenly it’s the 0,1% that’s the problem.
It’s all about putting the blame on someone else so you don’t have to question if you might be a little bit responsible, too, with your lifestyle…
They’re talking about the top 1% of Germany VS the top 1% of the world. If you reframe your thinking to be about the world instead of just your country, you might find your position as one of the 99% percent changing. I don’t make much in the USA, I certainly wouldn’t call myself rich, but just being employed, above minimum wage, and single means I’m probably above that threshold.
Half the population of Germany makes it into the global 1%? So 40 million Germans are in the 1%, a group that is 80 million people in the world?
People severely estimate how many Westerners there are. The US alone is like 4 or 5% of the world population. If you’re in the west, you’re in the top 15% of the world, but not likely the top 1%
That’s true! But I think more than one “front” can be open in this battle. And we also need the ones that can be won quicker or easier. Or at least start those too.
Lmmfao, yeah good luck with that.. (hint: the people who own those companies also own the government who makes the laws, there is no reforming capitalism, it's designed that way)
The problem is that to obtain those big pistons, you need the financial backing of those big companies. So eventually as an honest politician climbs the ladder, he has to sell out, or fizzle out. You can’t win federal elections without PAC money.
Until you hit critical mass on those small politicians, and they change the playing field. The problem is seeing them only as stepping stones on the way to greatness, and not as a power in their own right.
How do you think we could stop the pollution from those companies (most of which are oil producers) without also directly impacting normal people? There’s no way of getting at the structural that avoids individual change.
Individuals should change. We absolutely do not need the majority of products, and can still keep the modern conveniences without all the excess and waste.
The statistic that “Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions” is better understood as “Just 100 companies responsible for selling 71% of global fossil fuels”. It’s fundamentally saying that there’s a few large coal, oil and gas companies worldwide selling us most of the supply.
If you want those companies to stop polluting, that amounts to those companies not selling fossil fuels.
Which is honestly the goal, but the only way to do that is to replace the demand for fossil fuels. Cutting the US off from fossil fuels would kill a ton of people if you didn’t first make an energy grid 100% powered by renewables, got people to buy electric cars, cold climate heat pumps, etc.
Honestly as a kid I thought I had opened a wormhole in my bedroom. I was sleeping on the floor on an inflatable mattress which had an attached bedsheet that didn’t come off. During the night I turned on my side, flipped the bed, it hooked onto the wardrobe door handle and I was suspended upside down diagonally.
I’m convinced bedding defies physics at this point.
No idea how I did it, all I remember is waking up very confused. It was an air mattress that didn’t inflate properly and I had a habit of sleeping on the edge which I’m guessing is how I did it?
A lot of it won’t happen on its own though. While direct deaths from climate-related things (floods, fires, wet bulb events, whatever) will happen, you can bet your ass that there’ll be a lot of murderizing too.
We could kill the people who are not only directly responsible for, but who are actively refusing to stop the climate collapse because they want to keep making money and lording over us all from their super yachts (after giving them the opportunity to surrender their wealth for redistribution and stop their exploitation of course, which they will refuse), and actually have a realistic chance of stopping it.
Yeah but the people that will be dying won’t be the ones with the biggest carbon footprints. It’ll be climate migrants from underdeveloped areas or island nations.
Yeah, but cost of living differs. Nonetheless, killing people without attributing the actual cause of pollution to the polluters (companies, private or state controlled) is meaningless.
science_memes
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.