this post was submitted on 01 May 2024
504 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39104 readers
2399 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The worst thing to happen to bottled water companies was pipes and if Nestle or Ozarka could ripe out everyone’s plumbing they’d do it in a heartbeat.

I'm not defending these companies, just pointing out that using the companies as an excuse to change nothing about your own habits makes no sense.

Its very cool to have a shop that’s plastic free in your little town, but I’ll be damned if I can find an equivalent in America’s Third Biggest City of Houston, TX. At least, not one that’s 30 minutes drive.

Right in the center of Houston. Although having lived in Houston for a number of years, I understand that you could still easily live a half hour from here. But if you work in downtown, it's always the option to grab it on your way home.

But, also, keep in mind that you are right now trying to make excuses rather than look for solutions. I'm not saying you have to shop at one of these places, I offered my experience to demonstrate how, even when it's available, people would still rather buy the convenient disposable crap.

At some level, you have to concede its the structure and not the people.

It's both. This is my point. Too many people don't want to put in any effort to make things better, they just want to point at corporations and say "not my problem." It's how they deal with the cognitive dissonance of claiming to care about this issue, but at the same time not doing anything about it. "Well, what can I do?" A lot. You can do a lot. If you frequent that store in Houston, and encourage more people to, they can open up other locations make it even more convenient for more people. We all have to shift our behaviors to make it work.

It shouldn’t have to be a struggle to avoid generating trash.

Also agreed. However, again, not an excuse to change none of your own behaviors. You can both try to do better and push for better policy.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Right in the center of Houston.

Which is 30 minutes drive from anyone outside 610.

But if you work in downtown, it’s always the option to grab it on your way home.

That's true, assuming traffic in that area isn't miserable. There's also a WholeFoods in the Galleria Area that has had similiar services, but I don't even try to get near it during rush hour, because its pure gridlock.

Too many people don’t want to put in any effort to make things better, they just want to point at corporations and say “not my problem.”

I don't think that's true. What I have found to be the case is that independent action is expensive and time-consuming. You need some kind of business model to make it work, and that quickly turns "community effort" into "full-time job". And if you've already got a full-time job, you're not going to be able to afford to sidestep all the businesses on every corner offering you the easy way out.

At some level, it absolutely is a corporate problem. Because even if you do succeed at a local level, you're working in the scale of gallons while they're working in the scale of mega-barrels. Systematic problems require systematic solutions. It can't just be half a dozen people on one street in Houston changing where they shop.

You can both try to do better and push for better policy.

Okay, but then when do you have time to do anything else?

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

No one is denying it is a corporate problem too, they have the lions share of it; the only one denying responsibility here is you.

And you are (implicitly) arguing that you can't put any effort in, because it's either do nothing or it's a full time job. This is nonsense. I go to this store once, maybe twice a month. But the latter only because it's convenient. It's not even remotely a full time job.

But also no one is saying you have to do everything at once. I even noted i'm still very much a work in progress.

The important thing is to try, rather than just throw your hands up and claim you have no responsibility.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

the only one denying responsibility here is you.

Oh good. Then there's no problem. My output is infinitesimal on a global scale.

I was worried for a minute, but I guess since everyone else is taking this problem seriously, it should be fixed shortly.

The important thing is to try

An individual endlessly forced to attempt an exhausting futile endeavor is a punishment in Greek Mythology.

But on Lemmy, its supposed to be a panacea.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My output is infinitesimal on a global scale.

Even the single most offending business can claim only a small percent of the total damage. Does that absolve them? We both agree the answer is "no."

I was worried for a minute, but I guess since everyone else is taking this problem seriously, it should be fixed shortly.

None of this was said nor implied. I've been talking about how we are all responsible, and you've been trying to justify taking no individual steps to make things better.

An individual endlessly forced to attempt an exhausting futile endeavor is a punishment in Greek Mythology.

I disagree that it's futile, as I've already mentioned that the more people do it, the more businesses will cater to that. And if every individual makes the change, it would be massive.

But on Lemmy, its supposed to be a panacea.

Your argument is failing which is why you have to put words into my mouth. I think you're beginning to realize this. I just hope it turns into actually taking responsibility for what you can control: your own actions.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Even the single most offending business can claim only a small percent of the total damage.

When industries are cartelized, that's less true. There's a real knock-on effect between firms, such that a procedure change in a single heavyweight forces others to follow suite or divide off into niches. Classic example of this was Exxon's adoption of Oracle database suite. Once they got on board, all their clients and partners were dragged along for the ride.

Another great example is the provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act that throw billions into grid overhauls that prioritize green energy. Wind/Solar dipping under coal has set off a massive construction frenzy, particularly in Sunbelt states like Arizona and Texas. You can claim no single coal plant is responsible for climate change. But when a MWh of power from wind gets under coal, it doesn't matter, because every coal plant sees a reduction in business and every wind farm sees a surge in consumption.

All that to say, these aren't individual problems. They are systemic. And they can only be solved systemically.

I’ve been talking about how we are all responsible

That's simply not true. If everyone on my block were to throw themselves off their roofs tomorrow and reduce consumption to a flat zero, climate change would continue apace. If the senior staff at these 60 corporate plants did the same, and there was suddenly a vacuum of leadership/lobbying going into the opposition to climate change reforms, the story would be entirely different.

We are not all responsible. Not in a privatized for-profit corporate hierarchy of an economy.

Your argument is failing

Your fallacy is the Tinkerbell Effect

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Your fallacy is the Tinkerbell Effect

Despite me very explicitly and clearly saying that companies have the lions share of the responsibility, you claimed my argument, that we all have some responsibility and we should change our individual actions, was claiming it's a "panacea." You were the one who made up something that wasn't there.

I also know that my local shop is moving into a bigger space and has talked about possibly even opening a second shop. I've also turned friends into their products and they still shop there. Just just like companies can spread their influence by changing, so can individuals. So your claim that it's "infinitesimal" starts to fall apart if you actually apply your own logic to yourself.

You need to convince yourself that your actions have no affect, because it's the only way to say you care while doing nothing. It's how you cope with that cognitive dissonance: pretend it isn't there.

You're really recognizing the fault of your own position here, it's just the opposite of the Tinkerbell effect, where if you pretend it isn't there, it's not.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Despite me very explicitly and clearly saying that companies have the lions share of the responsibility

the only one denying responsibility here is you.

Even the single most offending business can claim only a small percent of the total damage.

I’ve been talking about how we are all responsible

if every individual makes the change, it would be massive.

Uh huh.

You need to convince yourself that your actions have no affect

Damn this accumulated body of evidence and understanding of causality. If only I had been blessed with sweet ignorance and endless optimism.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

No one is denying it is a corporate problem too, they have the lions share of it;

I’m not defending these companies

And you're trying to argue that i didn't say this.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people will turn to outright lying in order to avoid admitting that they might be wrong.

If only I had been blessed with sweet ignorance and endless optimism.

Nah, just ignorance and endless dishonesty.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And you’re trying to argue that i didn’t say this.

I'm pointing to all the instances in which you contradict yourself.

And that's been the name of this game since forever. The bait and switch of "Everyone needs to pitch in!" and "Its all on your shoulders, we can't afford to do anything more".

Nah, just ignorance and endless dishonesty.

Businesses screaming "Stop me before I kill again!" and blaming everyone else for the new pile of bodies.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’m pointing to all the instances in which you contradict yourself.

None of those contradicts that. Is this going to be the pattern? Just throwing dishonesty upon lies instead of just admitting you were wrong?

The bait and switch of “Everyone needs to pitch in!” and “Its all on your shoulders, we can’t afford to do anything more”.

No one here is baiting and switching anything. This is a desperate strawman.

Businesses screaming “Stop me before I kill again!” and blaming everyone else for the new pile of bodies.

This is funny. Using this context, your argument is "well businesses kill a lot more people than I do, so the few bodies i'm racking up I'm not responsible for." It's you blaming businesses for the bodies you're needlessly piling up.

Im pointing at all of our piles and saying "look, you can actually make an effort to decrease yours while we fight to decrease theirs." You're arguing that your pile does not count because it's small.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

m pointing at all of our piles and saying “look, you can actually make an effort to decrease yours

This has no impact on a problem at the scale of industry.

If we were talking about picking up litter at the park, sure. But when we're discussing the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, there is no solution that isn't systematic.

You’re arguing that your pile does not count

It functionally does not. I can't pollute at the scale necessary for anyone to notice, individually.

And zeroing my pollution out does nothing to mitigate the problem.

Even at the scale of city blocks - hundreds of people - there's no impact.

The only solution is systematic.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

You're making my argument for me.

You're effectively arguing that there is no point in picking up your litter at the park because there is a pacific garbage patch...and man the garbage can is all the way on the other side! It's like a full time job to throw away my litter! Me throwing away my litter is so tiny in the grand scheme of things, so it's not my fault if I just toss it on the ground.

We both agree major changes need to happen. But every time you leave your litter out, you're contributing to the problem as well and shoulder some responsibility. It's not like throwing out your litter precludes you from pushing for systemic changes. It's just something you can do, right now, to minimize your contribution to it.

And buying from places like I suggest is even more useful because it helps them thrive and spread. While I don't see how throwing away your litter really helps it spread.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You’re effectively arguing that there is no point in picking up your litter at the park

I said the exact opposite

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

No you're main argument is effectively arguing that. Or I should say it's the equivalent argument.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That strawman is taking one hell of a beating.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's not a strawman, it's an analogy; I'm not saying this is the argument you are making, but the equivalent of the argument you are making.

Although, I have to laugh at the fact that you claimed I said the exact opposite of what I literally and explicitly stated, and now are all up in arms over an analogy as a "strawman." lol

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’m not saying this is the argument you are making, but the equivalent of the argument you are making.

When you reverse an argument and claim it is equivalent, you are either extremely illogical or dishonest.

I have to laugh

Perhaps you're experiencing some kind of mania.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

When you reverse an argument and claim it is equivalent, you are either extremely illogical or dishonest.

Okay, I get it. You realize your position is no longer defensible and lying is all you've got now.

Take care.