Tommy Siegel | Bluesky | website
Transcript
Comic in 4 Panels:
Header: It’s That Easy!
Panel 1: The year is 1994. A dad with short black hair, in a blue shirt, red shorts, and white sneakers with calf high white socks, kneels with one arm resting on a knee and the other raised demonstratingly in front of a kid in a green ball cap, yellow shirt, blue pants, and green sneakers. There is a round metal trash can behind them.
Dad: Pick up your litter and save the Earth!
Panel 2: The year is 2004. Same dad, but in brown cargo shorts, brown shoes, and ankle high white socks speaking to the same kid. There is a green recycle bucket behind them.
Dad: Recycle and you can save the Earth!
Panel 3: The year is 2014. Same dad, but wearing a bike helmet, black athletic pants, and black sneakers to the same kid. A bike is behind them.
Dad: Reduce your carbon footprint and you can save the Earth!
Panel 4: The year is 2024. Same dad, but he’s in the same outfit from panel 1. There is a massive fire behind them.
Dad: Completely restructure global economic systems and you may be able to save a remnant of humanity!
One of the most brilliant (and evil) tricks that big corporations have used is to shift the blame for climate change to normal people: just recycle, don’t use plastic straws, and buy our CO₂-neutral products, and everything will be fine!
While not unimportant, it’s a very small change compared to the pollution of corporations and private jets. It’s easy for them to pay lip service to the environment while the real pollution goes on unimpeded.
Environmentally inclined people feel like they do something and don’t rally against the real problem. They just have to convince everyone to live like they do and the environment will be saved!
And even worse, it split us up again because if you point that out, the environmentalists are against you too. Because everything counts. Well yes, but…
Billionaire oligarchs flying in to climate conferences every year on private jets by the thousands, where oil executives are regularly invited to give the keynote speeches, while not accomplishing anything policy-wise or binding to materially reduce the rate or impacts of climate change, is the epitome of greenwashing.
“What menial lifestyle changes should we tell our consumers to adopt this year to keep them off our backs?”
It’s abusive victim blaming by psychopaths
Environmentally inclined people feel like they do something and don’t rally against the real problem.
Actually we have already been lobbying and protesting and trying to change the system for decades.
The work might not be visible, but it’s due to resource constraints, not because we are delusional and think that decreasing global CO2 emissions by 0.000000027% will fix the biodiversity loss.
Oh, I’m not saying that there are no activists anymore, just that the corporations successfully distracted large parts of the population by shifting blame to the consumers.
private jets
that seems a bit too specific. what about all the other planes? ships?
Oh, I just singled them out because they are big offenders and completely unnecessary in general.
You already can get from A to B without them, the only usage they have is to save rich people time and the indignation of traveling with the poor.
While there is some truth to this, this line of thinking is a trap because it removes responsibility from the individual.
Coorporations don’t pollute the world for no reason. They do it because there’s too many of us consuming too much crap.
Changing the whole system (regulations, etc.) is not a safe plan. Clearly it did not work out.
Stop buying so much crap online.
Look at it from the other way around: Capitalism is dependent on endless growth to function. To that end, consumerism is one tool by which capitalists sustain that endless growth rather than the problem in and of itself. It would be no good for them if people were able to just buy a thing when they needed it and it lasted a really long time. So they find ways to induce demand. A shiny new phone every year with planned obsolescence, advertising and other forms of cultural influence that equate happiness with disposable consumption, monopolistic tactics to crush alternatives, lobbying for government policies to limit alternatives and promote financial conditions that encourage consumption over saving, etc.
You can still say that at the end of all of this people ultimately “decide” to consume or not, but… what is that accomplishing exactly? Is our plan to just hope that every single individual person decides to lower their consumption, no matter how difficult or burdensome that might be given their situation? Especially considering how lopsided the actual emissions are towards the very wealthy? And if people started doing that… do you think corporations don’t aggressively push back in whatever way they can? Because that plan isn’t working either.
The “personal responsibility” angle isn’t actually taking responsibility, it’s just acting smug and accepting our doom is inevitable, but not your fault because you already “did your part.” Get organized or we all die. It’s that simple. It won’t be easy, but it’s our only real option.
Notably, this is all a very daunting task. While we need national and international action, that isn’t the only thing that matters. Activism in your community can help too. Plenty of stuff happens at the level of cities, towns, and counties. Roads and transportation. Zoning laws. Any gov or HOA requirements around grass and gardening. Tree planting. The gov’s relationship with utility providers. Fighting back against destructive development projects like data centers, parking lots, etc.
This is going to depend a lot on what the town is like though. Some places are going to be too poor to build any infrastructure projects like trains without funding from higher levels of gov. Some states have passed laws which try to limit local gov’s ability to enact environmental legislation. In some places it might be a pretty big uphill battle politically to make any big changes.
Ultimately the important thing is to gather enough people who can be engaged in the process that whatever your goals are become achievable. And hey, going back to the consumer side of this, if you have a lot of people, a boycott or strike becomes more of an effective option.
So to echo your final dismissive line: Go touch grass (then rip it out and replace it with native plants). This is coming from someone who’s been dealing with chronic depression for years and is finally making an effort to get out there and connect with people again. If I can do it, you can. (Maybe, idk your circumstances, maybe you have a condition even worse than mine.)
No, I actually agree with what you are saying to a great extent.
But the thing is, I still believe what I originally said is ALSO true.
I suspect the most effective thing is a combination of both approaches: personal resposibility + organization at various levels of society. Both are necessary, I believe.
Additionally, those corporations aren’t made up of robots. People work there and make the decision to cause this damage. It being done at work doesn’t absolve them of their responsibility.
I already reduced my carbon footprint. For some reason people get really mad when I try and blow up an oil refinery to reduce theirs.
The individual action PSAs were a deliberate fraud perpetrated by the worst polluters.
Precisely. It was strategically designed and marketed to shift the blame/responsibility from manufacturers to consumers.
It was a scam and distraction from the start created by advertising agencies.
“If they knew that to save .03 a unit we are dumping this byproduct in the river, they would have our heads on a platter. Get the PR team in here” “Why dont we tell them its their fault for buying it in the first place, but never really blaming any specific product” “Yeah, its all their fault”
tbf the solution was always the last one.
it’s just that they’ve been stringing us along.
But that was unimaginable to those, who promoted environmentalism, at least in the west.
What was the post on lemmy earlier today? The solutions are very simple, the problem is the people profiting off keeping things broken.
Just pick up that trash and YOU’LL BE SHOT IN THE FACE BY A MASKED GROUP OF PARDONED JAN 6 TRAITORS IN ALL DIFFERENT HOMEMADE ARMY MAN COSTUMES, CHARGED WITH “ULTRA LEFT WING” TERRORISM AND DEPORTED, AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, WITHOUT A TRIAL, FOR WOKE MARXIST CANCEL CULTURE AND DOUBLE TRANS!!!
Great comic. Good to see this is finally starting to dawn on people.
Good news is that we’re facing an incredible economic crash worse than anything we’ve ever seen, and the degrowth of GDP is going to be great to reduce greenhouse gasses.
Also 1994, don’t use ac refills that are bad for the environment. (Freon)
1984, don’t use these aerosaw cans that will kill the ozone layer.
- Make sure you have a catalytic converter to not hurt the environment.
1964 Oil companies noted oil will have marked climate changes by 2000. (We just didn’t do enough to stop it)
I man, the Montreal
productprotocol absolutely succeeded at protecting and eventually repairing damage to the ozone layer. So, if nothing else, that one’s a win on multiple levels.It’s just that the powers that be decided that they didn’t want to go through all that hassle again and the “people” decided that they were done sacrificing.
The attempts to repopulate populations of beavers and American buffalos are going great as well.
I don’t normally recommend YouTube channels, but if you are ever feeling down about everything there is a channel called Good_News https://m.youtube.com/@Good__News Which tries to capture all the decent bits of things that do occur while everything else looks bleak lol
I kinda feel like the years are all 10 too late. I definitely remember “reduce reuse recycle” as more of a 90s thing and the city I lived in got a recycling program around 1994. The no littering thing was already well engrained by then.
If individual behaviour didn’t matter, Canada wouldn’t have 307% of global per capita emissions, and the US wouldn’t have 285% while Finland only has 118% and Sweden has only 71% of the world average.
I picked those European countries in particular because they’re rich, have cold winters, and have a low population density in a lot of the country.
The reality is that the US and Canada are decades behind Europe when it comes to these things. Sure, this guy in panel 2 is telling his kid to recycle, but Americans never took recycling seriously. Meanwhile in Zurich you have separate bins for green glass, brown glass, clear glass, along with the normal paper and plastic. If you don’t want to recycle, you can do that, but it’s going to cost you. You have to buy expensive special garbage bags to throw out anything that you don’t recycle.
In panel 3 the guy is shown with a bike, but less than 0.5% of people bike to work. Meanwhile, in Finland, it’s about 10% of people who commute by bike.
I loved the recycling outposts in the apartments in Korea (they even took styrofoam, probably just burned everything anyways though), but in US I asked my local politician about recycling, even said I’d pay a couple bucks extra a month in taxes for opting in, and he said it’s been tried before but people abused the system :(. Not sure what he meant by abused but now I procrastinate taking my recycling to a center until my garage is stuffed and it’s a major chore.
It really seems to me like many people really want to recycle and make a difference if they can, they just need a gentle nudge, or for it to not be too difficult. It’s just that other people don’t want to feel bad about not recycling, so they speak out against any change that makes it easier. Then there are the idiots who are in denial and think climate change is a hoax.
I do not want to believe we are so fucked up. Just have enough my own shit. No.
Reduce your carbon footprints and break kntondata centres servers with a aluminum baseball bat.
2030: Run
Doomers, on Lemmy??!!
Trying to explain to you very gently that no one under 40 right now expects anything good to happen ever again.
I do. Guess that’s all fucked now then, eh?











