3 ms·

Blame the customers then (but they're mere employees), or the employers, then (but they must feed their family too), the banks and shareholders who finance them

Blame the customers then (but they're mere employees), or the employers, then (but they must feed their family too), the banks and shareholders who finance them maybe (but they all have families too), or the FED that makes this whole circus possible (but growth?!). It's like "First they came..." but in reverse. Who should we hold responsible? Aren't we all part of this dumb experiment? Edit: I spent a lot on a tiny flat just to live in a dense city so I can bike to work and heat my place as little as possible. I can't do much more to limit CO2 emissions actually, but I'm certain that those who make $180k to do haircuts because fracking are responsible one way or another.

nostrademons 8y ago
"Who should we hold responsible? Aren't we all part of this dumb experiment?" Yes. That's why blame is counterproductive when it comes to systemic injustices or unsustainable practices. Focus on incentives instead - why do the various actors do what they do? Is there a link that can be broken by creating an alternative or changing the payoffs to a certain action, and what's the cost of breaking that link?
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  First we must blame ourselves. We won't go far if we avoid that.
  - nostrademons 8y ago
    I'd disagree with that too. Lots of recent psychological research has shown that blaming & shaming does not work - it makes people (including yourself) shrink away from the problem, because the experience of being blamed is uncomfortable and as much as our conscious mind may tell ourselves to "embrace discomfort because we deserve it", the unconscious mind recoils. A better perspective is to accept that this is how things are and that we have the ability to change it into something better, and then take that as a call to action to search for what that "something better" might be.
    - rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
      That's obviously false because once I self admit that I was a big contributor to climate change and started blaming myself for it, I completely changed my way of life, for good. Why would you change if you are not to blame? And how can you convince/encourage others to change if you don't do it yourself first? Maybe "shrinking away from the problem" is a good think when the problem is excessive consumption / pollution. Being uncomfortable is necessary sometimes, otherwise you can't experience the reality of the problem (we're killing us, yes, it's uncomfortable, for sure). Your better perspective seems to be wishful thinking. Just say things as they are, accept some temporary discomfort and act to make things better from there.
      - ars 8y ago
        Someone else did not blame you, you made the choice for yourself. You call it blame, but that's the wrong word. > Edit: I spent a lot on a tiny flat just to live in a dense city so I can bike to work and heat my place as little as possible. That didn't help anything though. If you didn't get that flat, someone else would have. In the net you made no change at all. > I can't do much more to limit CO2 emissions actually Isn't that kind of the point the person you are replying to is making? You can't do anything else, and the one thing you did do, didn't even help. > but I'm certain that those who make $180k to do haircuts because fracking are responsible one way or another. And you don't see how this kind of attitude makes things worse? This is a system issue, not an individual one. If any individual (even a huge number of them) decided "I won't", someone else will, so their action did nothing whatsoever. This isn't going to change at the individual level. The person you are replying to has the correct idea: Change things so that naturally everyone switches to the better behavior, without blaming or saying "your fault".
pascalxus 8y ago
you hold voters/politicians responsible. Voters are the ones who keep voting for politicians that subsidize the oil industry. We need to stop the subsidies. And then add in some steep extra taxes on oil/gas to offset the damage to the environment. Once prices rise, all the sudden people and companies will start making the right decisions.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  Certainly not. Rich people can afford to pay very high prices so they don't have to change their life one bit. Only the poor will suffer if you want things to change meaningfully, nbut they aren't stupid so you'll end up with yellow vests everywhere, and government will become even more authoritarian (if not dictatorial) to "restore order and stop the eco-bullshit". Edit: I live a few blocks away from where yellow vests have been demonstrating for 20+ Saturday in a row. I had cars burning in my street several times now, so I'm just describing what's already taking place. Macron's government is getting more aggressive day by day, enough for the UN commission for human rights to send several warnings. Macron has made clear he won't change its policies one bit -- e.g out of the question to put back the tax on ultra riches (aka ISF) but poor people will have to pay more to drive to work... aaaaand we've now got the most violent protestations in France since the Algerian War!. The two former presidents (N Sarkozy and F Hollande) just said they expect the far-right to come to power very soon. TLDR: Don't expect people to pay taxes on essential goods if the riches don't have to change their consumption too. Either we, collectively, change or we don't. The message is quite clear.
  - ishjoh 8y ago
    I've been trying to follow the yellow vest protests but media attention has died down here is in the US. How many people are protesting at this point? Are the protests getting worse in damage and severity? Is the French government actually solving problems or just cracking down harder?
  - pascalxus 8y ago
    does the 0.1% really make that much of a difference in the environment? even if they were driving a 12mpg aventador all over the place, that's still only 5 times more pollution than a prius. and most likely they'll be driving less than a working person anyways.

nostrademons 8y ago

"Who should we hold responsible? Aren't we all part of this dumb experiment?" Yes. That's why blame is counterproductive when it comes to systemic injustices or unsustainable practices. Focus on incentives instead - why do the various actors do what they do? Is there a link that can be broken by creating an alternative or changing the payoffs to a certain action, and what's the cost of breaking that link?

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
First we must blame ourselves. We won't go far if we avoid that.
- nostrademons 8y ago
  I'd disagree with that too. Lots of recent psychological research has shown that blaming & shaming does not work - it makes people (including yourself) shrink away from the problem, because the experience of being blamed is uncomfortable and as much as our conscious mind may tell ourselves to "embrace discomfort because we deserve it", the unconscious mind recoils. A better perspective is to accept that this is how things are and that we have the ability to change it into something better, and then take that as a call to action to search for what that "something better" might be.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
    That's obviously false because once I self admit that I was a big contributor to climate change and started blaming myself for it, I completely changed my way of life, for good. Why would you change if you are not to blame? And how can you convince/encourage others to change if you don't do it yourself first? Maybe "shrinking away from the problem" is a good think when the problem is excessive consumption / pollution. Being uncomfortable is necessary sometimes, otherwise you can't experience the reality of the problem (we're killing us, yes, it's uncomfortable, for sure). Your better perspective seems to be wishful thinking. Just say things as they are, accept some temporary discomfort and act to make things better from there.
    - ars 8y ago
      Someone else did not blame you, you made the choice for yourself. You call it blame, but that's the wrong word. > Edit: I spent a lot on a tiny flat just to live in a dense city so I can bike to work and heat my place as little as possible. That didn't help anything though. If you didn't get that flat, someone else would have. In the net you made no change at all. > I can't do much more to limit CO2 emissions actually Isn't that kind of the point the person you are replying to is making? You can't do anything else, and the one thing you did do, didn't even help. > but I'm certain that those who make $180k to do haircuts because fracking are responsible one way or another. And you don't see how this kind of attitude makes things worse? This is a system issue, not an individual one. If any individual (even a huge number of them) decided "I won't", someone else will, so their action did nothing whatsoever. This isn't going to change at the individual level. The person you are replying to has the correct idea: Change things so that naturally everyone switches to the better behavior, without blaming or saying "your fault".

pascalxus 8y ago

you hold voters/politicians responsible. Voters are the ones who keep voting for politicians that subsidize the oil industry. We need to stop the subsidies. And then add in some steep extra taxes on oil/gas to offset the damage to the environment. Once prices rise, all the sudden people and companies will start making the right decisions.

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
Certainly not. Rich people can afford to pay very high prices so they don't have to change their life one bit. Only the poor will suffer if you want things to change meaningfully, nbut they aren't stupid so you'll end up with yellow vests everywhere, and government will become even more authoritarian (if not dictatorial) to "restore order and stop the eco-bullshit". Edit: I live a few blocks away from where yellow vests have been demonstrating for 20+ Saturday in a row. I had cars burning in my street several times now, so I'm just describing what's already taking place. Macron's government is getting more aggressive day by day, enough for the UN commission for human rights to send several warnings. Macron has made clear he won't change its policies one bit -- e.g out of the question to put back the tax on ultra riches (aka ISF) but poor people will have to pay more to drive to work... aaaaand we've now got the most violent protestations in France since the Algerian War!. The two former presidents (N Sarkozy and F Hollande) just said they expect the far-right to come to power very soon. TLDR: Don't expect people to pay taxes on essential goods if the riches don't have to change their consumption too. Either we, collectively, change or we don't. The message is quite clear.
- ishjoh 8y ago
  I've been trying to follow the yellow vest protests but media attention has died down here is in the US. How many people are protesting at this point? Are the protests getting worse in damage and severity? Is the French government actually solving problems or just cracking down harder?
- pascalxus 8y ago
  does the 0.1% really make that much of a difference in the environment? even if they were driving a 12mpg aventador all over the place, that's still only 5 times more pollution than a prius. and most likely they'll be driving less than a working person anyways.