this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
863 points (96.5% liked)
Comics
5916 readers
15 users here now
This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.
Rules:
1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules
2- Be civil.
3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.
4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine π΅πΈ . Zionists will be banned on sight.
5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.
Guidelines:
- If possible, give us your sources.
- If possible, credit creators of each comics in the title or body of your post. If you are the creator, please credit yourself. A simple β- Meβ would suffice.
- In general terms, write in body of your post as much information as possible (dates, creators, editors, links).
- If you found the image on the web, it is encouraged to put the direct link to the image in the βLinkβ field when creating a post, instead of uploading the image to Lemmy. Direct links usually end in .jpg, .png, etc.
- One post by topic.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
I absolutely agree with the concept, it's something I've argued in the past (although less in a loss of profit, than simply a loss of hard to enumerate "rights), I just never knew there was an established concept for it. So thanks for that.
But I don't see how it applies here. Unless you're agreeing with me and something like driving (one of the first examples given in the article) is an externality that should be addressed, and something that the individual often has some control over. But what it's always met with, as it was here, "It's really not my fault so I have no responsibility to change my behavior at all."
In my personal experience, and I'm lucky to have this available to me a lot: our rules is that if it's a 15 minute or less walk, we walk it. I bike to work most mornings when the weather is nice. These are things I could often just drive because "eh, what's my contribution going to do?" But I try my best (certainly still a work in progress), because i understand my actions are an negative externality for much of the rest of the world.
This doesn't preclude me from pushing for larger scale things too, but at least I also put my money where my mouth is.
Don't let me discourage you from cycling, that does help!
BUT
Even homeless people are still polluting at higher than sustainable levels. If we internalized the cost of pollution (with pigouvian taxes or whatever), then your efforts would yield even better results. As you can see under "Possible solutions", none of them involve placing responsibility on people around you individually - they're all addressing the externality at a systemic level.
It's not either/or; I can both work to decrease my personal impact and also push for systemic changes. It's just a recognition that responsibility does fall on the individual as well. If one cares about this issue, they should make changes in their life to minimize their impact. I understand that we can't solve it without a systemic change, because even from what I see all the time, right here, people who presumably care about the situation coming up with every excuse in the book to avoid assuming even a modicum of responsibility. Can't imagine how long it would take to get the current deniers on board.
The reality is that any change that is going to be top down is going to be slow; it's not coming for a while. Right now, you can make changes in your personal life. And even then, it's not all or nothing. You can just keep grabbing the low hanging fruit over and over again to minimize your personal impact.
And on top of that, any change coming from top down is going to affect the individual: things will get more expensive and less convenient. So you might as well get a head start on it.
Do you have unlimited time and willpower?
Married with two kids, we both work full time, cook dinner almost every night, i have multiple hobbies, regularly exercise, and I usually go out once a week with buddies to get a drink.
It's overwhelming if you treat it as all or nothing. I get that. I just started by grabbing the low hanging fruit, and when I realized that wasn't all that hard, I just reached up and grabbed the next. And then the next.
What if you took all the time you spend suggesting that consumers unilaterally pollute less, and invested it towards suggesting systemic change instead?
Is the goal here social status, or to maximize your impact?
"Every time climate discussion comes up and i point out that we can do things to decrease their own impact, iβm met with anger and relentless defense that they have no responsibility and itβs all corporations.
So I have little faith that any worker revolution will solve the problem."
Right, and focusing on that personal responsibility is a waste of everyone's time.
No one is saying to focus on it, just stop pretending it doesn't exist.
Why? You're wasting everyone's time by even bringing it up. Punch up.
Because we all need to start doing shit now, not wait for other people to do it for you. I'm not punching at all, just being honest. You're just grappling with the cognitive dissonance of claiming to care, but also not wanting to inconvenience yourself by doing anything about it.
That shit that we need to do now is outlined in that externality article solution section. We can't wait for other people to coordinate on defense for us.
Time spent on unilateral inconveniences is rival with time spent on systemic change, especially for a busy person like you. Trying to convince individuals one by one to reduce their carbon footprint simply doesn't work - that's why big oil popularized it.
Anything to avoid having to do something.
Lazy activists amirite
The hypocrisy of calling yourself an activist after telling me that I could be better spending my time than convincing one person. Lol if you think anyone believes that.
If you think we all ought to reduce our pollution down to sustainable levels, and you haven't, then aren't we both hypocrites? I'm certainly not saying you can't discuss your strategy at all.
This purity testing and infighting are exactly what big oil wants. You keep appealing to social status - you do something, you care, you're no hypocrite, you inconvenience yourself - you're a virtuous good guy. And your neighbors, why if they won't list their sacrifices, then what business do they have suggesting the very well-studied solutions that can actually work based on a concept you just learned the name of.
I've been very clear about my point: we're all responsible and we should all make an effort. I even outright told you that you don't have to do everything at once, but grab the low hanging fruit.
And you're trying to tell me i'm suggesting you get yourself down to a sustainable level.
Yes, clearly saying you share some of the responsibility and we should all make an effort to do something, i'm requiring purity.
You can argue my point, do you're mindlessly attacking a strawman youve made up about me.
And who said anything about anyone not being able to offer up other solutions? Lol
Again, anything to avoid accepting any responsibility, doesn't even matter if it's even based on reality at all. You need me to be a bad guy because otherwise you might have to admit I have a point.
This but not sarcastic. Every time you bring it up is a distraction from collective action that works. Your efforts have been diverted.
100% honestly, you sound like a great person. But that shouldn't matter to the validity of a person's arguments, and your approach is counterproductive.