3 ms·
What's the crux of your point here? I think you're imputing some wider meaning to what was actually a very simple point (i.e. saying that N people have no power
by samhw 5y ago
What's the crux of your point here? I think you're imputing some wider meaning to what was actually a very simple point (i.e. saying that N people have no power, just because 1/N people can't individually make a difference, is like saying the electorate has no power over an election result because one of them can't change the outcome).
My wider point is precisely that people have personal responsibility for carbon emissions, in exactly the way you described. In the car example you gave, the "corporations are responsible for most of climate change!" argument would attribute the emissions involved in manufacturing your car to the corporation instead of you. It's a compelling argument until you think about it, in concrete terms like that, for even thirty seconds.
- kragen 5y ago> My wider point is precisely that people have personal responsibility for carbon emissions, in exactly the way you described. I agree with that as far as it goes—certainly attributing the emissions to the car buyer is less foolish than attributing them to General Motors, US Steel, or Peabody Coal—but I think it's still an oversimplification, and that personal action isn't enough. And I would like you to stop using HN to congratulate yourself on how smart you are.