4 ms·
It sounds lazy to me to say that one industry was able to push through its interests for 50 years running, as if a democracy has no way of defending itself. It
by mxschumacher 6y ago
It sounds lazy to me to say that one industry was able to push through its interests for 50 years running, as if a democracy has no way of defending itself. It is scary how effective Exxon and Koch are (the book Kochland is a good read), but I don't accept that this strips all consumers of responsibility for all eternity.
What oil companies have done is certainly damaging to society - but let's please not lose sight of the fact that it is ultimately consumers who are calling the shots.
To me the truth is that we love convenience, enjoy travel and just having lots of stuff - hundreds of millions of people are fully aware of the effects of climate change and still choose to consume unbelievable amounts of oil, directly and indirectly. The title of Al Gore's "an inconvenient truth" is really quite apt - people watch and understand to then go on an fly across the globe.
If our image of the average citizen is that they are helpless in the face of propaganda/advertising, cannot think for themselves and cannot be held accountable for their behavior/decisions, then I don't believe that's compatible with a democratic system.
Consumers/voters have responsibility and corporations stand and fall based on how we all choose to spend our money. The one-sided criticism of oil companies is boring and almost childish in the way it deflects responsibility.
The geopolitics of energy: What's easy to forget about subsidies is that enormous shock the western world has gone through in 1973 - suddenly the oil stopped flowing and leaders everywhere figured out how vulnerable industrial societies are to even slight disruptions in supply. We also have to consider the security and moral implications of relying on Saudi Arabia and Russia for most of our oil needs - claiming that politicians are supply corrupted by oil money just shows a lack of appreciation for the complexity of the situation.
Eating meat is bad for the climate (methane emissions - you know the drill) - if you consume meat again after reading this, please don't blame it on politics, McDonald's or a lack of knowledge.
- Hoenoe 6y agoWas there an alternative? No. Why not.. Guess who stopped it? This liberal stand of calling people lazy or weak to not resist things that kills them self or the environment is a argument what puts the blame on the people instead of the one making sure everything stays in there interest. And yeah 'democracy' the term the US used to invade countless of countries in the name of freedom, peace and democracy. What were the wars really about the last 20 to maybe 50 years? About private interest of oil. The US democracy is nothing more then big industries calling the shots. Spreading so much propaganda people don't know what to believe any more. 50 years ago presidents were already shouting that they were going to cut back on fossil fuels. What happend there? If the US really was a democracy you would have had free healthcare by now. It's nothing more then a smoke screen. And by now with the help of social media propaganda has become more of a psychological weapon. They know exactly what triggers specific individuals and how to steer them. If we keep trying to fool our self with this believe that people should just be come magically immune to propaganda and advertisement we are pretty domed.
- acdha 6y agoI’m not saying they deserve all of the blame, especially for getting us into heavy fossil fuel dependency. Note that what I said was that I hold the people with the least agency and information less accountable, and especially assign blame to people who knew the problem and privately made plans around it while funding public denial. Ignorance isn’t good but it beats active lying.