Systemic problems require systemic solutions. Hoping everyone collectively changes their behaviour isn’t a solution unfortunately.
We have all the tools and technology to make a huge dent in this problem right now if not outright solve it. The most impactful thing you can do is spread awareness and do what you can to make this a voting issue if you live in a democracy. It could even be as simple is making it a non negotiable for how you choose to vote.
Lack of climate action needs to be a death sentence for the careers of the political class or it will become a death sentence for the the rest of us.
And if that’s not enough, then at least there won’t be any humans around to suffer through it!
But you’re fighting against a fundamental urge of life here … kinda hard to achieve that at a large scale. At least that’s why I tell myself and my kid.
Yea, you’re absolutely right. Humans are just animals in the end. Tho it is important to remember that your impact is absolutely microscopic, and even if 95% of people suddenly had the willingness, income and ability to make such changes to their life…
…there would still be a market for it, and we’d barely make a dent in the problem. Big corporations and billionaires are so much worse
Lmao, wow. That’s bleak. I hope you tell your kid this, they’re going to be living through collapse and you forced them into this because of fucking FOMO and peer pressure.
Well, no, wandering off into the woods is the biggest personal offset you can make.
And there’s a whole range between that and being a vegan anti-natalist, and once you get into calculating your impact on others the whole equation changes
This isn’t a problem that can be solved personally, it doesn’t make sense to look at it like that
Like say you blow up an oil rig or tanker… Congrats, you just made huge a carbon footprint.
Now say oil equipment gains a habit of being sabotaged, consistently. If it’s one person, It’s a problem for law enforcement. If it’s a consistent thing, fossil fuels have just become more expensive to produce statistically
Or, you know, we could pass a tax or regulate them properly
Regardless, my point is that climate change is a systematic problem, thinking of it in terms of individual action is already flawed
that’s a narrow definition that doesn’t really encompass all the ways in which eugenics has been practiced. frequently, as i have done here, it is used synonymously with genocide. stop practicing genocide.
Right, but from a “carbon footprint” perspective, making new humans is the worst thing a human could do for their footprint. What we need to get away from is the argument that our individual carbon footprints are too high. I mean, they are, but the ruling class is a lot more egregious.
And the easiest. But even if all animal products were eliminated worldwide tomorrow, it would probably still not be enough for the emissions target. So individual changes do not make a dent in the problem.
Being vegan is the most impactful change that individuals can make.
But we won’t change.
It is totally hopeless.
Systemic problems require systemic solutions. Hoping everyone collectively changes their behaviour isn’t a solution unfortunately.
We have all the tools and technology to make a huge dent in this problem right now if not outright solve it. The most impactful thing you can do is spread awareness and do what you can to make this a voting issue if you live in a democracy. It could even be as simple is making it a non negotiable for how you choose to vote.
Lack of climate action needs to be a death sentence for the careers of the political class or it will become a death sentence for the the rest of us.
I’ll do you one better: don’t have kids!
Maybe Vote for candidates who won’t FORCE people, and children, to have babies.
My trick is to not live in America
And if that’s not enough, then at least there won’t be any humans around to suffer through it!
But you’re fighting against a fundamental urge of life here … kinda hard to achieve that at a large scale. At least that’s why I tell myself and my kid.
Yea, you’re absolutely right. Humans are just animals in the end. Tho it is important to remember that your impact is absolutely microscopic, and even if 95% of people suddenly had the willingness, income and ability to make such changes to their life…
…there would still be a market for it, and we’d barely make a dent in the problem. Big corporations and billionaires are so much worse
No one want’s to hear “Don’t fuck in the front hole” after a hard day at work
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
No one want’s to hear “Don’t fuck in the front hole” after a hard day at work
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I can recommend explanations on youtube. It’s hosted by a clinical sexologist and covers topics around birth control and more
Yeah… after having a child we needed to double the size of our trashcan just because of diapers.
Dayum, and the smell of that must be horrid
Not really. We have one of those smell free diaper cans. They close after you put something in them.
Why did you have a kid?
What else were they going to use all those diapers for?
deleted by creator
All my friends are doing it.
Lmao, wow. That’s bleak. I hope you tell your kid this, they’re going to be living through collapse and you forced them into this because of fucking FOMO and peer pressure.
Yo here’s some fun links from the World Economic Forum and United Nations for you:
Global freshwater demand will exceed supply 40% by 2030 and 90% of global top soil and arable land is at risk of depletion by 2050.
I hope you’re proud of yourself.
you’re spreading eugenicist propaganda and you should stop.
Removed by mod
this is more eugenicist propaganda and a string of insults.
It was a joke you ham-sandwich. I and my wife wanted a family. Now we do. And so far it’s going quite well so I will take my chances. :)
malthusianism is gross.
Not having children is the most impactful individual change one can make, well over going vegan.
Becoming a vegan anti-natalist is the most impact a person can make.
I am uncertain of the numbers regarding both individually. You might be right.
Personally, I think both are important.
Well, no, wandering off into the woods is the biggest personal offset you can make.
And there’s a whole range between that and being a vegan anti-natalist, and once you get into calculating your impact on others the whole equation changes
This isn’t a problem that can be solved personally, it doesn’t make sense to look at it like that
what about destroying fossil fuel extraction or transportation projects?
Well that’s not really personal anymore.
Like say you blow up an oil rig or tanker… Congrats, you just made huge a carbon footprint.
Now say oil equipment gains a habit of being sabotaged, consistently. If it’s one person, It’s a problem for law enforcement. If it’s a consistent thing, fossil fuels have just become more expensive to produce statistically
Or, you know, we could pass a tax or regulate them properly
Regardless, my point is that climate change is a systematic problem, thinking of it in terms of individual action is already flawed
That’s not really a change that an individual can make. Either you already have them or you don’t.
It’s a choice you can make
this is eugenicist propaganda. also, going vegan has no impact at all.
No it is not. Eugenics is an attempt to improve the genetic quality of a human population.
We are talking about an attempt to stop climate change. We are not trying to “improve” the genetics of human population.
Eugenics sounds good at first, but human greed and corruption makes it an incredibly dangerous tool that should probably not be in the hands of anyone
I don’t think eugenics sounds good.
I’ve heard too many people (mostly elderly) speak out for it. It’s definitely a bad idea
those are the trappings, but the method is bare eugenics
No it is not. Eugenics is a pseudo-science about improvement of genetics. Period.
Trying to avoid climate catastrophe is not about improving genetics.
no, it’s not, even the wikipedia article we both love disputes this claim plainly.
if the method by which you try to avoid it is eugenicist, then it is.
I’m done.
I am not into bickering for no reason.
i didn’t ask you to say anything in the first place.
that’s a narrow definition that doesn’t really encompass all the ways in which eugenics has been practiced. frequently, as i have done here, it is used synonymously with genocide. stop practicing genocide.
No. Genocide is murdering people. Genocide is violence against people. Forcing people, against their will to stop existing.
Asking people to reproduce less is asking people (not forcing them) to exercise their own will.
genocide is also propaganda that encourages one segment of the population to cease reproduction.
that is true, but eugenics is something very different
in this case, it’s a synonymous use. they are totally equivalent in this respect.
Braindead take. We don’t need more children to be born into a world of suffering.
Then what do you suggest? Thanos?
i suggest we figure out a way to maintain the habitability of the planet without eugenics.
Right, but from a “carbon footprint” perspective, making new humans is the worst thing a human could do for their footprint. What we need to get away from is the argument that our individual carbon footprints are too high. I mean, they are, but the ruling class is a lot more egregious.
this is actual eugenicist propaganda. you should stop spreading it.
No it is not. It has nothing to do with eugenics. Nothing at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#Meanings_and_types
as i mentioned in the other subthread, eugenics is often used synonymously with genocide, which is the meaning i was connoting.
And the easiest. But even if all animal products were eliminated worldwide tomorrow, it would probably still not be enough for the emissions target. So individual changes do not make a dent in the problem.
being vegan has no impact at all.
Are you joking? Industrial scale production of cow and pig meat are disastrous for the climate.
being vegan doesn’t stop production.
“Hurr durr, me not killing people doesn’t stop murderers from killing people, so I should just kill people”
where did you find that quote, and why do you think it’s relevant?
What makes you think major nations will forego their cheapest source of energy if other nations are using it?
regrettably, God made animals taste good.