[sagartewari01]

Because it will be inconvenient. It's like an unspoken agreement between us, "listen pal, if everyone does it, noone can be held accountable, and if you stop, it will be useless effort since everyone else will keep doing it". The second statement is used very often to justify the lazy decisions our fragile mind takes.

[Nursie]

> The second statement is used very often to justify the lazy decisions our fragile mind takes.

Unfortunately it's also true, in a sort of self-fulfilling prediction kinda way.

And even if not, and it remains true for the majority of others, what have you done? Put in a load of extra effort and made your own life more difficult, but achieved nothing.

This is why collective action at the state level is necessary.

[gotocake]

Maybe, or maybe it would be unprofitable.

[sagartewari01]

I don't think it will be even fractionally unprofitable compared to billions of us dying. I just realized I'm making an argument for socialism. Anyone up for it?

[gotocake]

People have to care about those people, and have to believe in that reality instead of a pleasing fantasy, and they have to believe it will happen soon enough to matter to them. It turns out that a lot of corporate execs either believe in a fantasy (tech will save us), don’t give a shit if they make their money (lovely fallout shelters in NZ), or even see opportunities in a few thousand megadeaths.

If you can sell cigarettes to kids...

[00N8]

ever since I heard Noam Chomsky describe himself as a libertarian socialist, I thought, that's the non mainstream political affiliation for me!