|
|
|
|
|
|
by eiji
2164 days ago
|
|
|
I totally get what you are saying. But it still doesn't mean picking out a very polarizing industry, or any industry in particular, is going to help your cause. > And solving the issue of organizational pollution will have a much quicker and longer-lasting effect on the environment than pushing people to stop eating so much meat. You may have a quick effect, but certainly not a lasting one, or a big one. I couldn't count how many vanilla families and teenagers I know that are concerned about straws and plastic bags, but have a pool and fly on a vacation twice a year. The seat on that airplane is probably worth a millions lifetimes of "straw pollution".
You could eradicate all military pollution and it would probably be a rounding error. Jack up an airline ticket prices by 250% and you'll actually see something real. Jack up gas prices in the US by 200% and you'll actually see something.
Industry will happily throw anything under the bus as long as individual consumption isn't talked about. |
|
|
For example, I think it borders on possibly immoral / unethical to vaguely associate or connote that leisure airplane travel or pool ownership for generic working class people is somehow responsible for climate change and needs to be radically adjusted away from social expectations.
The reason I have no choice but to suspect an ulterior motive is that there simply is zero basis in fact to claim that certain patterns of consumption are problems like this. It’s purely a value judgment, and in this case largely disconnected from any citable statistics that expose wide impact for the class involved.
My opinion is that working class people should fly to foreign destinations for vacation if they prefer to, and making this access cheaper is an amazingly enriching and productive aspect of humanity.
It reminds me of a cliche quote from Dead Poets Society:
> Medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.”
We shouldn’t seek to ban the pursuit of beautiful memories and experiences of travel, nor criticize that as a selfish goal. That’s ridiculous. We should acknowledge how obviously desirable it is and develop ways to do it that don’t have the negative environmental side effects.