They do not care about one person doing this, however when all people do it or just a large group they do care.
The simple truth is that abolishing capitalism is not going to solve the climate crisis alone. Just due to all companies becoming cooperatives, does not mean everybody can just drive around in monster trucks, eat steak all day and live in giant mansions. As a matter of fact to solve the climate crisis, abolishing consumerism is a necessity. The way to stop that, is just very simply to consume less. Obviously that has to be done partly by laws like banning business jets for example, but those laws require a cultural shift. That means some people have to go ahead and be an example.
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
The people seem to have forgotten that their capitalist overlords can only overlord because of the money we give them and let’s be fair, most of those purchases are stupid crap to give us a seratonin boost. All I’m tryin ta say is I also get a seratonin boost every time their stocks crash because of a poor earnings report, so let’s all just not buy stuff for awhile.
Instead of No Nut November let’s try a No Sales September or something
It’s actually not that difficult only buying food and hygiene products for one month. It isn’t sustainable (for my household) since many things like electronic devices or clothing have a “shelf life” and will break sooner or later.
Still I love the idea and I think it would help many people to save money, use less resources and think about what really makes them happy.
Wow… this movement has just doubled in size. Continuing this exponential growth, the movement will have around 137,438,953,472 participants on September 1st, and thereby will have a profound if not catastrophic impact on the global economy. 🥳🥳
Just due to all companies becoming cooperatives, does not mean everybody can just drive around in monster trucks, eat steak all day and live in giant mansions.
So your only argument is a strawman? (I never said anything like that, nor do you seem to have a grasp on the impacts capitalism actually has or what the aims of abolishing it are)
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
You keep believing that, and continue to be completely non critical of who is promoting that notion to you and why (also another strawman, because not buying in to these useless distraction campaigns in no way shape or form means inaction, if anything, it’s usually the opposite, anti capitalists aim at the core of the issue, while tokenistic behaviour makes you feel like you’ve contributed when in reality you’ve impacted literally fuck all but your own ego - there’s a reason my comment made you defensive)…
How is it a strawman you clearly said that consumerism has no impact on climate change here:
Good for them for taking a stand against consumerism, personal shopping habits (even collectively, they equal less than a drop in an ocean) aren’t going to change neither climate change, nor inflation.
You probably did not mean it, but I thought I have to clear that up.
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
As for that, I have seen that way to often. Classic alternative to “but China”.
You keep believing that, and continue to be completely non critical of who is promoting that notion to you and why
This is were it becomes important to look at what the campaigns actually try to do. BPs famous carbon footprint did try to make everybody understand that the y use fossil fuels. It did not lobby to stop driving and take public transport instead. Same story with many recycling campaigns. They go for throw it in the bin, rather then show you how to not use as much plastic. The key in those campaigns is not to show a viable alternative, but to make people feel helpless. After all, when there is a working individual action, people might lobby to make it mandatory and that destroys their business. BP does not run ads to buy EVs instead of ICEs today. That would be a viable alternative. So they promote the red hering of hydrogen powered cars. After all the individual action of buying an EV instead of an ICE can easily be scaled, by making selling ICEs illegal.
They do not care about one person doing this, however when all people do it or just a large group they do care.
The simple truth is that abolishing capitalism is not going to solve the climate crisis alone. Just due to all companies becoming cooperatives, does not mean everybody can just drive around in monster trucks, eat steak all day and live in giant mansions. As a matter of fact to solve the climate crisis, abolishing consumerism is a necessity. The way to stop that, is just very simply to consume less. Obviously that has to be done partly by laws like banning business jets for example, but those laws require a cultural shift. That means some people have to go ahead and be an example.
This “the big guys up top, have to solve the crisis” is just a way to deny any sort of responsiblilty and therefore ends up without any sort of action.
The people seem to have forgotten that their capitalist overlords can only overlord because of the money we give them and let’s be fair, most of those purchases are stupid crap to give us a seratonin boost. All I’m tryin ta say is I also get a seratonin boost every time their stocks crash because of a poor earnings report, so let’s all just not buy stuff for awhile.
Instead of No Nut November let’s try a No Sales September or something
It’s actually not that difficult only buying food and hygiene products for one month. It isn’t sustainable (for my household) since many things like electronic devices or clothing have a “shelf life” and will break sooner or later.
Still I love the idea and I think it would help many people to save money, use less resources and think about what really makes them happy.
In September I will start making memes about it 🥳
I love this! Looking forward to September =)
Wow… this movement has just doubled in size. Continuing this exponential growth, the movement will have around 137,438,953,472 participants on September 1st, and thereby will have a profound if not catastrophic impact on the global economy. 🥳🥳
So your only argument is a strawman? (I never said anything like that, nor do you seem to have a grasp on the impacts capitalism actually has or what the aims of abolishing it are)
You keep believing that, and continue to be completely non critical of who is promoting that notion to you and why (also another strawman, because not buying in to these useless distraction campaigns in no way shape or form means inaction, if anything, it’s usually the opposite, anti capitalists aim at the core of the issue, while tokenistic behaviour makes you feel like you’ve contributed when in reality you’ve impacted literally fuck all but your own ego - there’s a reason my comment made you defensive)…
How is it a strawman you clearly said that consumerism has no impact on climate change here:
You probably did not mean it, but I thought I have to clear that up.
As for that, I have seen that way to often. Classic alternative to “but China”.
Just look at some research. So when you want more solar panels in your community, a good idea is to install solar on your roof first. That makes you 63% more likely to convince others to do the same. This can lead to tipping points being reached, which have a much wider impact. At this point the movement can be used to change the underlying system.
This is were it becomes important to look at what the campaigns actually try to do. BPs famous carbon footprint did try to make everybody understand that the y use fossil fuels. It did not lobby to stop driving and take public transport instead. Same story with many recycling campaigns. They go for throw it in the bin, rather then show you how to not use as much plastic. The key in those campaigns is not to show a viable alternative, but to make people feel helpless. After all, when there is a working individual action, people might lobby to make it mandatory and that destroys their business. BP does not run ads to buy EVs instead of ICEs today. That would be a viable alternative. So they promote the red hering of hydrogen powered cars. After all the individual action of buying an EV instead of an ICE can easily be scaled, by making selling ICEs illegal.