red assassin wrote: ↑
Tue, 13. Aug 19, 01:44
You give women's suffrage as an analogy: nobody got the vote by developing a political opinion at home, keeping it to themselves, and feeling self-congratulatory about the whole thing, but that's the closest thing I can think of to minor personal lifestyle changes (again, unless you're Jeff Bezos et al and can stop sailing your superyacht around).
Taking it literally too parallel. Perhaps choosing Fair Trade would have been better. The actions of a few gained traction - no Governments whatsoever involved. From there, companies and corporations got involved keen to bolster their corporate social responsibilities (but also slyly it ensured supply continuity and quality eventually too). Has it had an impact upon farmers and communities around the world? Demonstrably yes. But it was the actions of individuals that collectively resulted in a shift - and no Government law changes were required. If you waited for legislation, which funnily enough would almost certainly not happen due to it involving an entire supply chain across countries and continents, it'd have never happened. People do not need Governments to force changes, they can do it themselves - and sometimes more efficiently (no endless bureaucracy that pro-actively delays and holds things up - as i mentioned with lobbyists who have self interests in preventing action).
I am starting to get the impression you think I view this thread as the solution? No, that's crazy talk. But driving down energy usage (hence the kettle - boil what you need only) not only uses less energy, but saves people money as well. It's reasonable, practical, and ZERO EFFORT COST improvements that can be made. That's why I don't quite get your opposition to it. Unless you view such zero cost lifestyle improvements as "pointless effort" - at which point, why bother do anything. May as well wait for the Governments to decide (how on earth they do that if they don't believe it's voters desire to see it...
) what's necessary for us and legislate for it (again, good grief it takes decades if ever)... and then have to try and force people to adopt it with "the stick" method - as people won't want to take part unless it's made to cost.
Meanwhile, spreading awareness (without making people feel like they're being bludgeoned as per climate protesters trying to shut down a city centre) and showing people that you don't need to make sacrifices to be more responsible/considerate (and hoping this then translates into being more interested as well, wanting to see a change etc) can't be a bad thing. Hence, the thread... has a good purpose. But I don't imagine for one second anyone believes the solution is in the thread - except for perhaps you thinking that's what we think?