There are good reasons to not be a hypocrite. This isn't one of them. So, the theory here is that if we only purify ourselves enough, we'll finally get climate

There are good reasons to not be a hypocrite. This isn't one of them. So, the theory here is that if we only purify ourselves enough, we'll finally get climate skeptics to listen? If we only take on all the systemic problems with personal sacrifices? Like, don't show up to important policy meetings on principle because we'd have to fly there? It should be the other way around. Full-time climate activists should get to fly where-ever they want, whenever they want, and the rest of us should avoid flying. I don't think the article's theory of change is how any other kind of policy change happens. The strength of belief demonstrated by a minority doesn't, by itself, convince anyone or move policymakers. If you base your credibility on being a perfect example of how you want others to act, it's exactly what the climate skeptics want. You'll fail and they'll laugh at you. Because in this society we're all complicit until there are systemic solutions. I think there's more evidence for a small minority moving public opinion and public policy when they act in a coordinated, continuous campaign. Self-perfection doesn't come into it. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolent-resistance-beats-violent-force-in-effecting-social-political-change/ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolen...