175
submitted 6 months ago by kinther@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 30 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 17 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Gaia appreciates your sacrifice.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

Companies won't do anything unprofitable without being forced.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works -4 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works -1 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

I understand your point. I really do. My grandmother and great grandmother used to have a small farm where they would grow their own veggies and fruits and keep livestock. They would can all their fruits and veggies for the winter. They would fix their clothes so they could last longer and kids' clothes would be patched and handed down to younger siblings or passed to other parents. Same with toys.

But it's different today. You need at least two incomes to pay for a home now. You think you have time to can your food for a whole six months when you have a job? AND kids? People are already crumbling under the pressure of everyday life. They don't have time for this.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that our way of living is unsustainable, but this condition is being imposed on us. There only so much we can do. We need the government and companies to make the changes to enable us to live sustainably. But that means the opposite of growth and profit. It goes against the fundamentals of capitalism.

Unless we change the system, we can't be sustainable.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

I guess what I'm trying to say is that our way of living is unsustainable, but this condition is being imposed on us. There only so much we can do.

I think I'm in full agreement with you here.

We need the government and companies to make the changes to enable us to live sustainably.

I do believe I mentioned earlier that voting is one way we can "do our part". And with companies, we vote with our dollars. And again, I know it's not always easy to do so.

Unless we change the system, we can't be sustainable.

I think the key aspect is that it's not all or nothing. Changing the system is the only way to get us fully sustainable. And not just changing -- a complete overhaul.

Since that's impossible for any one person to do, I'm not suggesting anything of the sort.

We just need to vote with our dollars where we can. My suggestion is not to overhaul everything about our lives, but to be mindful and consider our options where possible. Because I think there are sometimes more options than we think there are at first glance.

I'm in Canada too. I know the cost of living crisis happening here now. And I know we have plenty of places with one grocery store that's still a 30m drive away. There are fewer options for people who live in those places. For those who live in cities, they tend to have more options.

Keep things to last as long as possible. Buy used. Re-use or repurpose things. Buy less junk. Have fewer things delivered. Eat more protein from non-animal sources. Not everything 100% of the time. But I think we should all try as much as possible for our given situations.

I think it's more important to try than to give up. It won't change everything, but it's how we can vote with our dollars.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

"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.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 months ago

Always has been. Men only, property owners, 3/5ths and all that.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

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.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

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.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

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

this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
175 points (89.2% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2257 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS