this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
5 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32162 readers
721 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mateoto@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

We are over the edge of no return.

We should stop begging for change and act now. Politics must hurt them with reforms, taxes, and the rule of law.

We cannot stop climate change now, but we can try to de-accelerate by fighting against big oil, corrupt politics, and billionaire newspapers supporting them.

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Ya right. When has prices went over 5 dollars a gallon in the US, people there list their minds. God forbid we should drive a bit less or consume less.

This is a consumer problem not big oil. The second biggest company in the world by revenue and by far the largest by profit is Saudi Aramco. And why are they so big and countries like Russia are energy giants? Because we are tax and regulated our oil companies significantly more while increasing our consumption. Instead of buying locally, we are now buying from countries like Russia and Saudia Arabia. Look how that is working out.

[–] AlbigensianGhoul@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Malcolm X has an old speech which applies very well to this issue as well. Too bad you can't vote for him anymore.

[–] hh93@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Too many people believe they can just continue living like they were 30 years ago - if big oil would stop producing stuff and plastics, gas and airplane fuels would not be available anymore then people would riot

Even threatening to increase prices to a level that would make sense to limit the use to absolutely necessary levels would piss off too many people to be a viable option because everyone just wants to believe that it's just for "the others" to change but not for themselves.

Everyone has to act and change their Livestyle...

[–] DreamerOfImprobableDreams@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (8 children)

This is the truth right there. Gas prices went up two measly dollars compared to normal in 2022, and everyone flipped the fuck out. People were prepared to elect Republicans-- fucking Republicans- to office, they were so furious about it.

And don't @ me about "100 corporations are responsible for like 90% of emissions". Who's buying those corporations' goods? Who's refusing to vote for politicians that'll meaningfully regulate these corporations? Who's spending all day fantasizing about Da Revolushun^TM that'll never fucking come (and would kill tens of millions of civilians and likely result in fascists winning and seizing control of your country, if not the whole thing splintering into a bunch of warring fiefdoms controlled by ruthless oligarchs) instead of getting to actual work trying to effect real change in the real world? And I don't mean "direct action" (read: looking edgy and getting photos for the 'gram), I mean actually fucking getting policy passed that'll have a real impact on people's real lives.

[–] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

It’s almost like our society is car centered, and raising gas prices directly results in worse outcomes for the majority of people. You can’t expect people to just stop using cars, but you can use the state to create massive infrastructure policies paid for wholly by the polluting industries who most heavily profit from our current situation. Use the next decade to build high speed rail, electrified busses and lightrails, subway systems, and other mass transit, and then when gas prices go up, people will have an option other than cutting back on their food to ensure they make it to work every day.

I replied to the wrong comment in this thread, but if I delete it’ll only delete from my instance, so I’m just gonna leave it.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Policy like regulating those 100 corporations?

[–] DreamerOfImprobableDreams@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. I said so explicitly in my previous comment.

[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seems odd to say

And don't @ me about "100 corporations are responsible for like 90% of emissions". Who's buying those corporations' goods?

People bringing up the 100 corporations are usually calling for regulations on them, and the "you're the ones buying the goods" people are usually calling for Personal Responsibility and Voting With Your Wallet.

[–] 1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s possible to both think those companies should be regulated and that people are doing almost nothing personally to help, including electing people to enact those policies. For most people I talk to the “but 100 corps” is a total deflection of personal responsibility. This crisis will not be solved without a good heaping helping of both personal responsibility and aggressive government regulation. If nothing else because that aggressive regulation will never pass into law unless people acknowledge their personal responsibility and are willing to accept the sacrifices that will come with it.

[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This crisis will not be solved without a good heaping helping of both personal responsibility and aggressive government regulation.

100%. People usually argue for one to the exclusion of the other but we need both.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Only one actually works.

You can do personal responsibility alone all you want. Nobody will join you. Government regulation affects everyone.

Selling people on personal responsibility is what the oil companies want, because they know it doesn't work. It gives you the chance to be high and mighty, while nobody else reduces their consumption, so their profits stay the same.

Definitely consume less if you can, but don't delude yourself into thinking that individual actions in reducing personal consumption achieve anything. Go out there and vote for politicians who propose better climate policies, maybe assassinate some oil, gas and coal company execs, etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] DragonAce@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

These companies will not change unless they are forced to do so and our government isn't going to do shit since most of congress is in the pocket of big oil. So what are our other options?

Everyone likes to blame individuals for not using renewables or buying an electric car, when it reality their options were limited in the first place by big oil. Most people can barely afford to put food on the table and green or renewable products are usually significantly more expensive and not really an option. Besides that, IIRC ordinary citizens only account for roughly 20% of all greenhouse gas emissions. So the onus lies on big oil to make changes and offer affordable renewable options instead of the same gas guzzling/polluting bullshit we've been offered up to this point. But like I said, they won't do something like that unless they are forced to do so, they will always pursue profit over people, unless those people get in their faces and force them to pursue other options.

[–] Zippy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If current green companies can't make affordable options, why in God's earth would you think it would be cheaper if conventional energy companies join the mix?

Your entire statement is conflicting. Angry about high costs being unaffordable then suggesting oil companies to not produce low cost energy that keeps prices down while acknowledging the high cost of green energy.

[–] explodicle@local106.com 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

most of congress is in the pocket of big oil. So what are our other options?

Vote only for candidates against FPTP. When that's gone, we can just vote for candidates who are against big oil.

[–] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago (21 children)

How many election cycles can we postpone climate action for?

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foreverandaday@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (16 children)

capitalism can't solve climate change :(

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›