this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
781 points (98.2% liked)
Microblog Memes
7433 readers
2777 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Want to enrich the quality of life of people? Stop wasting resources to travel the world, reduce your environmental impact so the people you plan on visiting can keep on living where their currently live.
Why? Our ancestors never worried about environmental impact, and it's clear that the only thing that matters is what we used to do.
Our ancestors used to find themselves in an environment that wasn't good and they'd walk to somewhere that was. Or starve.
Or we could, instead of shitting on people who want to see the world and and enjoy the abilities we've developed to do so, shit on the people who made the "not terrible" ways of doing that impossible.
Ok, so you'll agree that in the meantime people need to stop traveling then? Right? RIGHT?
How far is traveling? What means do you find acceptable? And until when do you mean?
Do I need to wait until I have access to a totally renewable train to go to the nice beach that's a 90 minute drive away? What about the 25 minute drive to the flooded salt quarry that gives everyone a rash due to the stunning population of migratory waterfowl? The 15 minute drive to the park on the river with a vaguely unsettling murk to the water?
Hey, you just mentioned a bunch of destinations that you don't need to use a plane to go to, good job, enjoy them!
Air travel is the issue, not traveling.
You'll have to forgive my confusion and understand why I might have thought you had an issue with travel in general. Writing off trains and boats didn't help either, nor saying that people who wanted to focus on alternatives to air travel were in favor of destroying the environment.
Are you going to give your phone away and live without?
So I should drive a huge diesel truck without a catalytic converter because if I don't do everything possible I might as well do nothing? Traveling the world is a luxury, get over it.
So, people should stop emigrating? Flying to Puerto Rico to see their families?
If people were responsible enough to take the environmental impact of air travel into consideration when making life choices they might reconsider their decision to move thousands of km away from their family.
Hell, if we just charged them based on the environmental cost they would realize they can't afford it.
No, you should sell your phone, computer and car because if you're that angry about people partaking in luxuries with an environmental impactcand you don't think "less impactful alternatives" are better than entirely forgoing the luxury, then it's hypocritical of you to do anything but walk or bike and eschew optional things with environmental impact.
It's quite specifically that you've been saying that other people should do without rather than doing better, so... You first. You have legs. You can bike. Our ancestors got along with less, so you can sell your car. You don't need a phone. It's a luxury you can live without, so sell yours and get over it.
Doing better is taking vacations close to home, it's not never going on vacation. People have visited 20 countries but have never visited their own country or they make themselves believe that they need to go to Punta Cana once a year to feel good about their life.
The cellphone comparison is keeping the same phone for years (receiving shorter distances in more energy efficient means of transportation) vs changing phone every year (taking a plane to visit another country). Well guess what, I've been using the same phone for years so guess I'm good here.
But you were arguing people shouldn't travel at all, citing our ancestors who lived their whole lives within a few kilometers. Now you're saying people should travel responsibly and live with moderation, which is pretty different from your previous point.
No, I'm saying people shouldn't take planes to travel, it's not normal to expect to travel 5000km as a one week vacation.
Right, which is a big shift from what you were saying before. Your previous position is what caused pushback, not a dislike for the environment.
In any case, I'm glad you've come around.