5 ms·

The fact that people benefit from something is not enough to assign any blame to them. Even if alternatives exist (they often don't), if they require a signific

by franga2000 4y ago

The fact that people benefit from something is not enough to assign any blame to them. Even if alternatives exist (they often don't), if they require a significant trade-off, blame is minimal. Even when it comes to buying products it's a tough sell - I know my phone battery is made with slave labor, but it's not like I can choose to buy the one that isn't. So when it comes to industry, we share exactly 0% of the blame - not just as individuals, but consumers as a group[]. The problem is two-fold: industry leaders are greedy and politicians aren't working in our best interests. If either of those went away, the problem would be solved. Unless you're in one if those two groups, none of it is your fault. [] In democratic countries, it can be argued that the voter base is at fault for electing these corrupt politicians. I largely agree with this, but it's a pretty complex topic.

Tao3300 4y ago
> In democratic countries, it can be argued that the voter base is at fault for electing these corrupt politicians. Like the batteries, it's not like I can choose the ones that aren't corrupt. The alternatives don't exist. In the rare event that they do, they get blocked out by the parties or rendered ineffective by their colleagues. At least it's that way here in the US -- which may or may not fit your definition of democracy. The major job requirement for an American politician is how well you can fundraise. And that's just to get a foot in the door of one of the entrenched parties -- they can still just decide to back someone else.
tekknik 4y ago
> I know my phone battery is made with slave labor, but it's not like I can choose to buy the one that isn't. But you can choose to go without the phone that requires the battery. Now I know the canned response is “it’s not practical these days to not have a smart phone”, but going without one will not kill you. If the only phone available killed one person for every phone sold would you still demand to have one?
- franga2000 4y ago
  Ok, so let's say I don't have a phone. But computers contain thousands of components, many of which contain minerals mined by slaves. So no computer either. Without access to the internet, there's almost no way to get a job. Nevertheless, I go to the employment center and say that my only condition is that the job does not require me to interact with any computers or other devices that contain minerals mined by slaves. None exist, so I go home unemployed (to an apartment building built by an oil tycoon in the 80s). Now I'm hungry, so I walk barefoot and naked (clothing is often is made by child labourers and with no regard for environmental impact) to the shop. Good thing I don't live in North America so I can actually go places without driving a (planet-killing) car! At the store, I want to buy some bread and vegetables, but discover that a rainforest was cut down to build the field where the wheat was grown and dangerous pesticides were used on the vegetables, leaking into the soil and poisoning the groundwater for the locals. Back home, I close the main central heating valve - it's powered by a coal plant after all. It's winter. It's now a race to see what kills me first - hypothermia, starvation or the random infection I got last week from a small cut that I refused antibiotics for because they were developed with animal testing. So who is the criminal here? Me, right now, using my 6 year old phone on the bus? Or is it the capitalists who pushed hypothetical me to the brink of death for trying to live "sin"-free and the politicians who oppose any attempt to keep them accountable? And more importantly, what's the solution? Because going full Amish isn't nearly as scalable as you might think.
  - tekknik 4y ago
    Why is going full Amish not scalable? How come I see many cultures living off of the land yet somehow you can’t? Where I grew up there were no stores or jobs, just a small population of farmers. All you’ve pointed out here is there’s a limit to what you’re willing to do for your beliefs, and that at some point you’ll accept someone performing slave labor to keep your fancy, but still not required, electronics.
  - airstrike 4y ago
    Just wanted to say this was incredibly satisfying to read. Well said.

Tao3300 4y ago

> In democratic countries, it can be argued that the voter base is at fault for electing these corrupt politicians. Like the batteries, it's not like I can choose the ones that aren't corrupt. The alternatives don't exist. In the rare event that they do, they get blocked out by the parties or rendered ineffective by their colleagues. At least it's that way here in the US -- which may or may not fit your definition of democracy. The major job requirement for an American politician is how well you can fundraise. And that's just to get a foot in the door of one of the entrenched parties -- they can still just decide to back someone else.

tekknik 4y ago

> I know my phone battery is made with slave labor, but it's not like I can choose to buy the one that isn't. But you can choose to go without the phone that requires the battery. Now I know the canned response is “it’s not practical these days to not have a smart phone”, but going without one will not kill you. If the only phone available killed one person for every phone sold would you still demand to have one?

franga2000 4y ago
Ok, so let's say I don't have a phone. But computers contain thousands of components, many of which contain minerals mined by slaves. So no computer either. Without access to the internet, there's almost no way to get a job. Nevertheless, I go to the employment center and say that my only condition is that the job does not require me to interact with any computers or other devices that contain minerals mined by slaves. None exist, so I go home unemployed (to an apartment building built by an oil tycoon in the 80s). Now I'm hungry, so I walk barefoot and naked (clothing is often is made by child labourers and with no regard for environmental impact) to the shop. Good thing I don't live in North America so I can actually go places without driving a (planet-killing) car! At the store, I want to buy some bread and vegetables, but discover that a rainforest was cut down to build the field where the wheat was grown and dangerous pesticides were used on the vegetables, leaking into the soil and poisoning the groundwater for the locals. Back home, I close the main central heating valve - it's powered by a coal plant after all. It's winter. It's now a race to see what kills me first - hypothermia, starvation or the random infection I got last week from a small cut that I refused antibiotics for because they were developed with animal testing. So who is the criminal here? Me, right now, using my 6 year old phone on the bus? Or is it the capitalists who pushed hypothetical me to the brink of death for trying to live "sin"-free and the politicians who oppose any attempt to keep them accountable? And more importantly, what's the solution? Because going full Amish isn't nearly as scalable as you might think.
- tekknik 4y ago
  Why is going full Amish not scalable? How come I see many cultures living off of the land yet somehow you can’t? Where I grew up there were no stores or jobs, just a small population of farmers. All you’ve pointed out here is there’s a limit to what you’re willing to do for your beliefs, and that at some point you’ll accept someone performing slave labor to keep your fancy, but still not required, electronics.
- airstrike 4y ago
  Just wanted to say this was incredibly satisfying to read. Well said.