[heresie-dabord]

We can do both, of course. But making a sufficiently global change to our ecological dystopian future involves some sociologically hard problems:

Human population, the sociology of capitalism, industrialised consumerism, the unscalability of communities problem (both established structural debt and newer dysfunctional debt) and the consumerist voting fallacy ("I will vote with my money").

If there were fewer people, if there were less industrial-scale consumerism, if communities were scalable, if consumers were in fact globally engaged as purchasers and voting citizens...

I have heard an environmental scientist say that the order of responsible choices from worst to best is:

= buy an ICE vehicle

= buy a zero-emission EV

= DO NOT buy a vehicle

Of all the difficult sociological challenges that could certainly bring change, it seems that those likeliest to change are the human population (fewer) and zero-emission vehicles (more).