this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
52 points (96.4% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5229 readers
518 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This article is spot on, I really dislike the doom and gloom messaging that is common to attempt to motivate people into action. It makes people feel hopeless. Climate change solutions all have other more immediate benefits for say human health or financial safety, or even just preventing deforestation. It's more motivating to emphasize the benefits of doing something rather than the consequences of not doing it.
Even with major corporations being the primary culprits of climate change, individual choices of people add up. Taking public transit or biking, improving energy efficiency/home weatherization, eating less meat, and generally getting off of fossil fuels often provides the greatest benefits to the people who make those changes.
At this point even if we did all the things you mentioned today it wouldn't add up to anywhere near enough.
How else would you convey the direness of the situation? We've spent decades reeling out possible solutions and they've fallen on deaf ears.
IMO the lack of "doom and gloom" has caused people to severely underestimate the magnitude of the situation.
IMO I think the “doom and gloom” messaging has backfired into apathy and nihilism. Yes we should be honest with the seriousness and severity of the situation but I think it’s more important to provide and message hope. Also provide solutions, alternative economic systems, simpler and happier lifestyles, and especially pathways to off-ramp from the consume till we die society that we currently live in.
The "doom and gloom" messaging is just the reality of the situation, it's dishonest to suggest otherwise. Apathy and nihilism are appropriate responses to it as we are entirely at the whims of governments/corporations.
Also you think nihilism and apathy are where the majority of people are? Most of the world barely even understand the full picture so putting a positive spin on it is just allowing them to keep their heads in the sand.
In terms of solutions, at this point it's converting to fusion power in the next few years (unlikely) or getting the whole world to ditch capitalism and actively decarbonise their economies as a priority. We are powerless to affect either. If we were able to I'd be fully on board with your messages of hope.
People know whats going on and the reactions are numerous to count. Nihilism/apathy tend to win out not because we don't have solutions already on the table to solve it but because those solutions are not consumer based and easy. We are not going to solve this via a magic bullet, fusion power isn't going to solve the underlying problem of consumerism/neo-liberal capitalist economics.
We are not powerless to make the change, thinking that way only empowers those who have no problem with killing the planet for profit. There are millions of people all over the world actively working on changing the economic conversation away from GDP growth and consumerism to something else, however they don't get the broadcast airtime in the US. There is degrowth, postgrowth, environmental socialism, doughnut economics, etc all with different ways/ideas to build an economy without consuming the planet in the process.
Honestly the best action an individual can take is join a group or organization that is actively trying to shift the conversation. Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future are just a small sample of the millions of organizations and groups who are actively trying to build a better future, find a local group where you live and join in-person. The work is going to be long and hard but the hardest part requires individuals to put their own ego in check and do the work not for their own personal benefit but for the benefit of the collective and generations to come. We are powerful together, but divided and stewing in our own misery and loathing about the hand we have been collectively dealt doesn't solve anything. If anything it makes it worse. What works is getting involved with your local community, talking to people, building networks of support and collective activism. The more we do that the better shot we have at staving off the worse possible future.
I disagree, most people I speak to are unaware of the scale of the problem or still hold delusions that it will be sorted out by some kind of future tech by the end of the century. A shot of doomerism gets their attention way more than banging on about positive change and plastic straws.
I am fully aware fusion isn't a magic bullet, that's the reason I provided it as an example. It's about as likely as convincing the world degrowth is the better option.
The solutions are not consumer based, nor are they possible at a grassroots level. Literally everything tried so far has not moved the dial in terms of emissions. Joining groups like ER, whilst commendable, is not going to affect enough change in time.
Millions may be discussing change as you say but there are billions who are too concerned with day-to-day survival to contemplate long-term issues like climate change.
Best things to do are actually to not have kids and vote for green candidates, both of which I'm doing. When we see a global top-down movement via policies and laws that might make any kind of difference then we can discuss individual action in positive terms.
On top of those, it's important to support politicians who will make doing the right thing the normal default choice. I've got a note about how to do that in the US