this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
865 points (95.4% liked)
Political Memes
5453 readers
2693 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wish I had your privilege of only having to worry about two things; the environment and Palestine.
I'm one of those folks who has to deal with the police, doctors, schools, roads, and the possibility of a fascist takeover of the government by someone who has been praising Hitler for years.
I'm sorry if I've offended your high morals.
I'm not offended - I understand most people have very different priorities. I personally think that preventing a mass extinction event is more important than police, doctors, schools, roads (for cars), and fascism; because I happen to think that a catastrophic climate cascade means nothing else matters. Healthcare is nice, but doctors will all be dead when the biosphere becomes unlivable.
I don't stand with the genocidal Hamas voters, nor with the genocidal Israeli voters.
And that is exactly what the reply means by privilege. It is a luxury to be able to think that far ahead.
It turns out, when you're at risk of being dead in a week, a month, or a year, you tend not to care about whether humanity will be around in 20 years.
So having the ability to focus on the long term is a privilege that the vulnerable do not have.
Of course, these things are not mutually exclusive. But when you have two parties that both suck at climate care, but only one of them is trying to incarcerate or kill LGBTQA+ folks, for example, and your focus is on things like "don't vote for anyone or you're supporting fascism and climate destruction" it reeks of privilege and a disregard for the immediate welfare of your neighbors.
EDIT: To put it another way - if the cost of humanity's survival is sacrificing our LGBTQA+ neighbors, perhaps humanity is not worth saving.
So it's okay to help yourself in the short term, and by doing so help make the biosphere unlivable?
The fact that you interpret fear of persecution and resistance to authoritarianism as a selfish act tells me everything I need to know about how you view the world. And I choose not to engage in this conversation with you. 👋
I don't think fear of persecution and resistance to authoritarianism is selfish. I think some things are vastly worse than others, e.g. wiping out more than 50% of genera and more than 70% of species, and making the biosphere unlivable for most creatures larger than mice - is incredibly selfish; and being complicit in genocide is a line some people won't cross no matter if it may benefit them personally in the short term. I understand most people have very different priorities, and care more about their own short-term goals even if those goals make them complicit in omnicide.
And your ability to be concerned about such things is your privilege
It is obvious that you are generally comfortable with little risk to your daily life riding on this election
Talk to me again when you're sacrificing your own immediate safety instead of the immediate safety of others to uphold your high-minded values
You're contributing to making the biosphere unlivable. You're using electronics to communicate on Lemmy. That means you've contributed a huge amount of CO2 in all kinds of ways- a significant amount was expended just to construct whatever device you're using.
So you're going to stop using electronics and the internet, right? Otherwise you're just helping yourself in the short term, something you are implying you do not want people to do.
https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2017/07/co2_saved/giv-3902H9Q7lx2HE5M7/
I'm not sure why you think that changes what I said. You're making a contribution to making the biosphere unlivable by using that electronic device you're using in multiple ways. What other people do or don't do does not absolve your own culpability.
You just don't want to live without the luxury of the internet, so you're evading.
Some things are sustainable, others are not - by orders of magnitude. Some of the former are not sustainable when done by billions of people.
And now you're just trying to weasel out of the thing you are pointing fingers at others for.
This was you earlier:
That is exactly what you are doing right now. You just think it's okay for you to do what you criticize others for in order to have your own luxuries.
Some things are sustainable, others are not - by orders of magnitude.
Growing a tree, and then cutting it down to boil water is sustainable.
Producing more oil than any country ever has, is absolutely not sustainable.
Accessing the internet using an open source OS on hardware other people threw away, is sustainable, even when following the categorical imperative where the other 8 billion people also do it.
https://shift.com/blog/news/the-carbon-footprint-of-the-internet/
All of that carbon you're responsible for just by being on the internet to do frivolous things like post on Lemmy doesn't sound sustainable to me, but it sounds like you'll come up with any excuse you can to avoid the fact that you're being very hypocritical.
No one is forcing you to use the internet. It is your choice to contribute to that CO2 because you want the luxury of things like Lemmy. You want your luxuries but you also want to point your finger and blame others for doing the same thing.
Hypocritical.
So about 0.272 tonnes of CO2e per year per https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-much-ton-carbon-dioxide ?
Of a total of about "2.1 tonnes per person annual emissions budget necessary by 2050 to meet the 2 °C climate target (Girod et al 2014)" per https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541#erlaa7541r22 (Girod 2014 seems to be paywalled).
That total seems below the 2.1 tonnes of CO2e per year sustainable target per person by 2050.
Yes, again, you are excusing your being complicit in this because of your need for a luxury. You know full well that adding CO2 to the atmosphere is not a good thing. You just want to feel like you don't contribute.
And as far as your righteous veganism goes, I bet you aren't even considering the vast amount of carbon that is needed to farm and ship all the plants and possibly fungi you eat that can't be grown in your area.
Or are you now going to claim you only eat locally-sourced vegan food at farmer's markets in enough bulk to survive the winter?
And then we get into the spices. If you claim you only use local herbs when you cook, I won't believe you.
Sorry, you help contribute massive amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere as well. You just want to blame everyone but yourself.
There is a difference between sustainable, non-sustainable, and catastrophically unsustainable; and it's an important difference. Having a locavore diet is very easy where I live, except for vitamin B12 supplements which are not locally sourced or made. I don't know what you mean by "survive the winter", it's not an issue where I live. I only use salt and turmeric when I prepare food - tho some processed food I buy contains other spices.
Good thing a ton of carbon wasn't used to get that salt and turmeric to you.
Oh wait, it was.
Also that processed food, half of that came from across the planet.
But hey, you have to have your luxuries, so everyone else has to sacrifice.