1d ago

always remember that

73 comments

I somewhat dislike using stats like this. Like sure climate change isn't a problem solvable by individual actions such as those but those companies aren't just evil nonsense either. You look them up and a lot of them are mega companies that produce much of the things people use daily so climate change isn't solvable without restructuring our world order and relationship to consumption and nature. Just people sometimes seem to use this stat as a talking point on how daily life and current world order doesn't need to be changed drastically just get rid of these handful of mega polluters and emitters when its not that simple.
- The companies are not good or evil, they're neutral. They only care about making money.
  If burning more oil generates more profit, they'll do that. If burning less oil generates more profit, they'll do that. And, they'll stop operations as soon as people stop buying their products/services.
  On the other hand, they're not honest. They use marketing to create a demand for their products and services. They lobby politicians to be exempt from regulations. They lie about how environmentally friendly they are.
  You can't 100% blame these companies for climate change because they're just selling things that people want to buy. But, you also can't 100% blame people for buying those things because they're not doing it with full informed consent about what's happening with the money they hand over.
  In the end, we need to completely change the way western civilization lives if we want to slow climate change down, and part of that process will involve punishing companies that don't prioritize doing things in an environmentally friendly way.
- They would not sell (nor profit) something that people refuse to buy.
  We are the ones doing this.
  
  Much easier to control and regulate the actions of 57 than 7billion - that’s the point
  
  They would not sell (nor profit) something that people refuse to buy.
  So they are wasting money on hiring advertising and marketing companies?
  Then there's also planned obsolescence and licensing deals that make it impossible to continue using and repairing things (even mechanical things like tractors, and living organisms like crop seeds).
  Sure, people can try their best, but there is only so far we can go before it gets so inconvenient to not fall into the consumerism trap.
  
  Their marketing strategy isn't just blaming the consumer, it is to sell that their product is "sustainable and green", and people instead of not buying, they buy their "sustainable and green" product that shouldn't even exist in the first place. So no, they are not wasting money on marketing, they just changed the strategy.
  Coming back to people, have you tried convince someone to change their preferred message app even knowing that belongs to an evil company and making the change being a literal 5 minute task?
  In my experience people aren't even trying. Just blaming the same way companies and politicians do. If we really tried our best many things would have changed already. I believe that everything we have now is just a mirror of our collective greed, and we are doomed if we expect the other (companies and politicians) to change anything.
  
  Everyone wants change, no one wants to change. It’s a tale as old as time.
  
  So they are wasting money on hiring advertising and marketing companies?
  Perfect place to link the ol' Bill Hicks take on marketing.
  
  carbon footprint is a psyop by gas companies to make people feel like individuals are responsible for climate change not them
  
  they can't know what we will buy before they make it. they manufactur on speculation.
- sorry that the meme is not grasping all the different ecological, economic, social and psychological aspects of mass extinction and climate catastrophe on the individual and systemic level

73 comments