• frigge@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The comic just points out the irony of buying into the personal responsibility narrative while participating in the hyperconsumption which is the real driver of pollution.

    Therefor it still works imho, because the car is a ridiculous toy for rich people and stands for over consumption and over production due to capitalism. And the whole carbon foodprint thing was a PR stunt by the fossil fuel industry to shift the narrative away from the systemic issues towards individual responsibility. Obviously the bottle cap is not about the carbon foodprint at all. It is to reduce plastic pollution. But imho that confusion makes the joke even stronger because most people gobble up those pseudo-band-aid solutions to real issues without questioning their effectiveness in the slightest.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      IDK, this all just left me confused. The bottle caps are for reducing plastic waste in nature, not carbon footprint, and its also not about personal responsibility, because it is law or regulation (at least in EU). If it was responsibility then that guy bought them, because they wanted to do it and wouldn’t ask that way. And I also didn’t get how that has anything to do with a electric stunt car decompressing air…

      Maybe I’m just unfunny or obtuse, but I didn’t get the joke… Only sense I can make of is how nonsense it is, and if that is the goal. Great… But what are they saying with that comic then?