• unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Im on board with both of these things. But if you try to invalidate peoples small victories with larger issues, that they have no direct control over, for no good reason, they will rightfully dislike you.

    • joostjakob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      2 months ago

      You do have direct control over fisheries as much as you do over straws. But indeed, don’t invalidate. Say “if you like X, you might also want to do Y which has an even greater impact”

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Direct control = if i could decide that the fishing boat doesnt go out tomorrow or how they do their fishing

        Indirect control = i decide not to eat fish

        You also only have indirect control over plastic straw production, but my point wasnt the “control over” part but the “let people have their small victories” part. If you actively harass people for doing good things, they will stop doing good things.

        • bountygiver@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          in this case quite a number of people would want plastic straws back because the paper straws has been bringing a significantly worse experience. So yeah they do want this good thing to stop.

          • slurpyslop@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Do I have “direct control” over the US government because I can withhold my vote come election day?

            • Evkob@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              2 months ago

              Not much, admittedly, but not eating seafood does a heck of a lot more than not using straws.

              • slurpyslop@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                not eating seafood does a heck of a lot more than not using straws

                which isn’t a justification for trying to invalidate a small victory

              • slurpyslop@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                a “small victory” doesn’t imply a direct, tangible impact

                “direct control over” does

                you’re comparing two things when the point of the original comment is literally that you shouldn’t compare them good job

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can control the use and manufacture of straws as much as I can the use of plastic nets in fishing. I can reject straws and not eat fish, thus marginally reducing demand for both.

    • Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      The straws are a win, a very very small win that we just stopped at. It’s like we just said “mission accomplished” while tossing an empty plastic cup into the bin.