Not my OC but what I’ve believed for years: there’s no conflict between reducing your own environmental impact and holding corporations responsible. We hold corps responsible for the environment by creating a societal ethos of environmental responsibility that forces corporations to serve the people’s needs or go bankrupt or be outlawed. And anyone who feels that kind of ethos will reduce their own environmental impact because it’s the right thing to do.

Thoughts?

  • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 months ago

    I agree entirely. You should live ethically because it’s the right thing to do, and the fact that it won’t save the entire world on its own shouldn’t be an excuse not to. That there’s so much leftist pushback on this idea of maintaining your ethics in your personal life is really disheartening. Consumption really is a mind virus that is determined to keep you hooked, even among those who should know better.

    If we can’t maintain our ethics in the small bubble that is our own lives, how exactly do we intend to maintain them on a societal level? And if you don’t respect nature now, why should I expect you to start respecting it after we change some laws? Start now, at least for some of it. You’re gonna have to do all of this eventually anyways. So what do you have to lose?

    • cinnamonTea@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m all in favour of everyone deciding this for themselves. Every person acting ethically is a good thing.

      What I disagree with is people pushing other people to act ethically in the same ways when the impact is so small and their activism could focus on much bigger fish

        • cinnamonTea@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          By changing the system to give them better options and easier choices. It depends on why they don’t care or know, of course. I’m assuming a low SES here, where there’s little energy to inform yourself or change, different strategies should be used for other groups, like more education in schools, etc

      • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Do you similarly believe this for pushing others to vote? A single vote is small fish too.

        • cinnamonTea@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Not an unfair point, I grant you. I’d say that while a single vote is a small drop as well, it also requires much less effort of someone, whereas changing your life consistently every single day in ways that are difficult and unpleasant is a lot more to ask. I’d say it’s a matter of effort vs. reward

          • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Staying informed so you can actually vote effectively is a constant effort too. Especially if you actually participate in the primary process and local elections. You just don’t see that as a constant effort because it’s something you already do. It’s an ingrained part of your routine and habit.

            Similarly, I don’t see reducing my consumption as a constant effort, because it’s something I already do. I eat less meat, I use less plastic, I buy less junk than I used to. It took a bit of adjustment at first, sure. But now it’s just something that I do.

            • cinnamonTea@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              You’re right, that is also an effort, though I think it’s one that our current situations make easier, given the amount of free information and the ubiquity of smartphones. Still, I see your point.