• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 month ago

    I think you’re mixing up the means with the end. if your goal is to reduce animal product production, you need to go where animal products are produced and stop it. if your goal is to reduce pollution, go to where pollution is produced, and stop it. but simply stopping consumption, on an individual basis, isn’t going to do it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 month ago

      Its just as unrealistic that one person affects global pollution as much as it is unrealistic that one person go and personally stop the pollution at the source, isnt it?

      It seems like you are arguing noone should do either direct or indirect action, since neither is feasible on an individual basis.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 month ago

        Its just as unrealistic that one person affects global pollution as much as it is unrealistic that one person go and personally stop the pollution at the source, isnt it?

        no, one person can shut down a pipeline. it’s just a valve you can turn off.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 month ago

          You know thats absurd or else people would be doing it. Its not just a valve, and its not out in the open with no protections. My cousin used to guard the Alaskan pipeline. How do you suppose I go and affect that without getting shot?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              01 month ago

              Its less likely than people choosing not to eat meat.

              I’m not sure what sort of great effect you expect a single person to have attempting to either steal all the worlds animals and hide them or to destroy oil infrastructure.