[throwaway010718]

As much as I want to believe climate change can mitigated by individuals making conscientious decisions, it seems as naive as telling someone in 1970 that if they care about the smog then they can just buy a catalytic converter for their own car.

Climate change progress, like the catalytic converter, will be 1% innovation and 99% legislation. If you care about this problem please vote. Voting is arguably the most important action you can take.

[edejong]

No, voting is passive. Be politically active: talk to your neighbors, at your local sports club, at work and at local events on climate change. Contact your local legislators. Give options to local polluters by researching options for subsidies. Write to your congressmen and ask for the most pressing local actions.

Democracy does not start with a vote. That’s just a step in a large process.

[jtolmar]

Voting is the victory lap. Organize.

[mrhappyunhappy]

Any ideas for organizing at scale?

[jtolmar]

Read No Shortcuts [1]. But in summary, determine the group of people you want to organize (a bounded group, not "everyone"), reach out to people (face to face conversations), identify community leaders who are on board, try doing a small bit of activism, and see what percent of your target group showed up. Identify leaders who got people to show up, and look for different leaders where they didn't work. Repeat, using any success as incentive to get more people interested in participating next time.

[1] https://global.oup.com/academic/product/no-shortcuts-9780190...

[anthay]

Join XR? https://rebellion.earth/

[digitaltrees]

If you want to be active, I just formed a non profit to fund litigation initiatives for kids and young adults to sue the government and corporate interests that are responsible for restoring their constitutional right to a freaking future. Consider donating to fund similar litigation.

[neverartful]

I think your suggestions are exactly right for individuals. If someone's reaction is "What can/should I do?", what's the best response? Serious question. What are the more reputable resources for providing these answers?

[sanxiyn]

Montreal Protocol was a success. We already have a legislative framework, starting with Kyoto Protocol. What is needed is technical alternatives that made Montreal Protocol a success, i.e. innovation.

[mrhappyunhappy]

Innovation takes time. We have little time.

[john61]

Do not underrate the power off setting an example.

[arrrg]

Setting an example is great and doing what you personally can to reduce your footprint is certainly not wrong but it’s completely and utterly wrong to focus on that and talk about it. That’s just the wrong approach.

Deniers and their ilk will talk about nothing but personal failings, not systematic approaches. That’s a rhetorical strategy they are comfortable with and where they will always be able to win (since society is currently structured in a way that makes it very hard to reduce your footprint).

People might think that them personally doing something might solve the problem, which couldn’t be further from the truth. People might think that since they did something they don’t have to do anything more.

Focusing on personal responsibility is the completely wrong approach. This needs taxes, this needs bans, this needs huge political changes. There is no alternative. There is nothing you can personally do to solve this when those things don’t happen.

[mrmonkeyman]

Political incorrectness will follow.

Being a loser with no money and/or friends, possessions, status, whatever, will affect your ability to influence greatly.

I find a lot of activist types are afraid of wealth or status, which usually translates to them having none. Unwashed, bearded folks are an anti-example. We need well-adjusted, respectable, active, socially able members of society setting an example.

Once the cool kids go green, everyone will. Make it cool, make it have status, make it hip. Think Tesla.