World News

This is true but individual action is still necessary. Just because it's important that we hold corporations and the wealthy accountable and curb industrialized pollution doesn't mean that the average person isn't needing to make significant changes. We can't both maintain a consumer mindset and abdicate individual responsibility while also demanding sweeping societal changes.

12% of global emissions are individual car drivers alone. The individual is a sizable portion of the problem, and we need a multi pronged approach that attacks corporations outsized impact and reduces certain emissions from individuals as well.

If we dont support billioniares business is, and turned "the individual" into an organized mass, it would work.

I dont know if this opinion, to change using amazon and the other big retailers, will ever come though. I saw someone legit promoting aliexpress for a product not too long ago, and I was surprised no one gave them shit for it.

If Working for and using, for example, amazon, was suddenly shamed and everyone stopped using it, it would stop making the billionaire at the top money. If no one buys the product, no one is willing to work for the company, the company would disolveand bezos still wouldnt be broke, or held to account, but this revenue stream would stop.

Will it happen though? I feel like a nhilist for saying, I dont think so.

Here's a handy guide to a better world for the rest of us!

Every single person is part of the problem. Some more, some less. Corporations do not harm the environment because they are inherently bad. They do it because people (all of them!) love stuff.

Significant parts of the global climate usage are directly tied to individual actions. 12% is consumer car driving alone. So yes, the schmuck driving a Toyota Corolla is making a significant impact. The sooner you realize that the better, we need action on both corporation and end users.

If there was a decline in consumption of climate harming products, large enough that these companies could see it in thier financial reports, I cant believe it wouldnt have any effect on the market.

Youre points are valid, and I agree with them, but if a majority wanted to (ideally, and I dont think they will) I think "voting with our wallet" would work, it is simple, but not practical because humans seem to love convience.

If you kill a cat a day going forward and your neighbour kills two cats a day, you’re not exempt from blame and responsibility for the cats that you kill.

What you’re doing is feeling sorry for yourself and shirking responsibility for the harm that your leisure plane travel does to the climate and in extension to the environment and biodiversity.

Look up the numbers of how much CO2 emissions each person can be afforded to keep climate change and temperatures steady. Now try to factor in plane travel and eating beef while also living with basic amenities. Please get back to me, if you find a way to do those things while also not exceeding the emission threshold per capita, ie. not doing evil and contributing to our apocalypse in glacier speed.

If people didn't consume so much corporations would have to change. But people need the latest phone, car and whatever else.

I understand the sentiment, but doesn't "the industry" essentially produce things that are for "us", even if indirectly?

Factories don't exist for their own sake, they exist to make an end product for people. So if you want to change that, we do need to consume less, like the parent you replied to said.

industry doesn't need to pump out so much product if we consume less

I don't think you should think about it in terms of blame, I think that's a big part of the propaganda. Seeding of anger, frustration, and apathy. Rather than allowing empowerment, organizing, and hope.

Blame should only be reserved for those that act with careless disregard. And doing things that are good for the environment shouldn't be seen as 'paying back'. You are actively doing more than you should and letting your actions speak louder than your words. And those actions can (and should) be part of building the collective that will force those truly responsible from stopping.

EDIT: WHOOPS! Wrong comment.

I was coming here to say this how does traveling less make a difference when a million (unknown if a true number but I didn't look up how many trucks are in the USA) semi trucks are on the road every day (and the rest of the world too). None of those things even significantly reduce anything until industry stops wasting so much. J just look at the food and retail products thrown away every day. Dumpsters full all across the country, all that pollution to produce some shit and they just throw it away

Your first point is so huge IMO. If you can’t enjoy being at your own home then trying to have some kind of fulfilling life is going to be a steeper uphill battle than it already was.

Been on the dating apps recently. The number of people who present "travel" as their entire personality is unsettling. Every photo somewhere exotic, every prompt answer is about traveling. It makes me wonder what they're all running from. I don't disagree that vacationing can be enjoyable, but there's more to life.

And don't get me started on the people who try to say that "traveling" is different from "vacationing" and that what they're doing is travelling and not vacationing. Egads.

Come on. You're off by multiple orders of magnitude. No, a single private plane is not offsetting millions or hundreds of millions of people living more sustainably. I'm genuinely not sure if you're this clueless or just trying to manipulate opinions.

Plus, emissions are additive, so you can avoid your own emissions, while doing what you can to keep billionaires in check.