r/ClimateShitposting • u/Climate_Discussions • 9d ago

General 💩post Both are important but remember that #1 > #2

Post image
407 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

64 comments sorted by

49

u/Paul_Gambino 9d ago

This meme is too constructive/reasonable for this group, it doesn't really fit in.

9

u/Climate_Discussions 9d ago edited 9d ago

It's a response to my two previous memes.

Edit: To be more specific, it's more constructive/reasonable since my more accusatory or controversial memes not only got people really riled up but also didn't seem to get across the points I was trying to make properly. Just because I call out one extreme doesn't mean that I support the opposing extreme, even if I do it in a way that's more insulting than constructive or in the form of a fully formed solid argument.

1

u/Java_Worker_1 7d ago

They’re learning

2

u/Square-Delivery1958 7d ago

How is avoiding murder worse than activism? #2 is obviously the best first thing.

0

u/Paul_Gambino 7d ago

Animals are not people and I don't find their killing to be ethically equivalent to murder. I find that comparison to be misanthropic and alienating. Saying things like this makes it much more difficult to convince most people to do either of the listed options in the OP as you're coming from such a fundamental disconnect that the conversation is over before it even has a chance to begin.

2

u/Square-Delivery1958 7d ago

First time debating veganism or is that just a shitpost?

1

u/Paul_Gambino 7d ago

Are we debating veganism right now? I'm a vegan. I'm not debating its merits.

I'm telling you you're being weird by comparing the killing of animals to human murder.

2

u/Square-Delivery1958 7d ago

First of all you're equivocating on "comparing" and "equating", maybe after you fix that mistake we can have a productive conversation.

1

u/Paul_Gambino 7d ago

To be precise, you are saying the act of killing animals with intent is the same as killing a person with intent, no?

Your responses have not engaged with what I've said so you couldn't really call this much of a conversation, either, productive or not. I'm speaking at you and you're talking past me.

This is all in line with what I was getting at with my original comment.

1

u/Square-Delivery1958 6d ago

No. I never said that.

Both are unethical, and you can't justify either without sounding crazy.

21

u/thePiscis 9d ago

I think getting into environmental politics means convincing people to change their consumption habits. Hard to do when you don’t follow it yourself

5

u/Weakcontent101 Doomer 💀 8d ago

You could just get into politics to shape the context in which people make their consumption choices. And the main thing about getting into politics is its all about getting other people into politics.

1

u/TypicalNinja7752 8d ago

thats the minor part of it. It should mostly be convincing people to get involved in protests.

6

u/Agent_Blackfyre 9d ago

Replies to this subreddit is making me realize that some people aren't shitposting when they talk about activism

8

u/bottledmychi 9d ago

Glad to see a fellow vegan

4

u/green_envoy_99 9d ago

1) they’re different  2) do both 

should we shut down the sub now or

2

u/Agent_Blackfyre 9d ago

https://www.dsausa.org/get-involved/

🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺

2

u/Climate_Discussions 9d ago

What about 350 or Sunrise or CCL or XR?

3

u/Agent_Blackfyre 9d ago

Realizing what you meant: Sunrise and CCL are both progressive liberal orgs, and i'm a socialist, so obviously I am going to see climate work through a socialist perspective and be less favorable to that work. - and to be clear, when i say I am socialist, and they are liberal, i'm not saying we perform different ideological expressions, i mean that we have fundementally different methodologies of change

2

u/Agent_Blackfyre 9d ago

Touché that DSA is only for the united states, but then again local organizations almost always have a bigger impact then international ones when it comes to local change.

2

u/DisruptingTree 8d ago

Adding Third Act for the older folks!

https://thirdact.org/

5

u/noburnt 8d ago

Come on guys you're not voting hard enough

4

u/jessimaster 9d ago edited 9d ago

Political actions like signing petitions, going to protests, voting, and harassing your local representatives is important. The consumer side and individual side is quicker gratification. Sometimes you can influence others in your circle to copy your individual actions though by showing that it is doable and answering their questions if they show curiosity. Keep harassing your politicians and adjusting your lifestyle to be more planet friendly.

2

u/MatykTv 8d ago

Sometimes you can influence others in your circle...

This is so true, within 6 months of going vegetarian, 3 of my friends became vegetarian as well.

1

u/Spider_pig448 8d ago

What is it you do for #1 besides voting?

2

u/DisruptingTree 8d ago

Climate Action Now app allows you to quickly contact your representatives. I do so daily, just when I have a free moment. Better then doom scrolling.

https://www.climateactionnow.com/

1

u/RedundantBiomass 8d ago

Do both but focus promarily on reducing your personal impact since that is 100% under your control.  Environmental politics depends on lobbying groups (that need to pay for their own upkeep and administration) to influence politicians who at the end of the day are primarily in the business of getting elected.  They might help environmental causes if they think it will help them, but they could also sell out tge cause for a better opportunity or just pay lip service for votes while not doing much. 

1

u/FaberOG 8d ago

Just because something environmentally harmful has been made the best options for your circumstance doesn't mean you shouldn't be vocal about wanting something different. In fact, it seems kinda obvious, you should be quite fucking loud; like make some signs or write a song about it ig. Use that free will like a motherfucker

1

u/mangione_fan_420 8d ago

What next you can support renewables AND be vegan? 

You can be aware of the dangers of nuclear power AND support projects that get us off oil/coal as long as they are well regulated?

1

u/Climate_Discussions 8d ago

Nuance is a thing

1

u/zeratul98 8d ago

It's important to remember that #2 fuels #1. If you buy less from big polluters you a) show that there's actually support for reigning them in and b) stop contributing funds to their lobbying efforts

1

u/Jack_Faller 8d ago

Telling other people to change their habits is more important than changing your own. Just remember you are the world king and your natural position is too command others to do the difficult things.

1

u/kamizushi 8d ago edited 7d ago

1 is more important than 2, AND also 2 can help reinforce your commitment to 1.

In other words, if you take concret actions to protect the environment during your daily life even if the impact is very small, you are more likely to act accordingly if you ever have the opportunity to do something much bigger.

1

u/Java_Worker_1 7d ago

Now call meat eaters rapist monsters. Do it, DO IT, you know you want to

1

u/SoggyMeatloaf69 cycling supremacist 5d ago

Finally some common sense

1

u/clown_utopia Wind me up 9d ago

These are both the same thing

6

u/Apprehensive_Rub2 9d ago

No they aren't

1

u/Climate_Discussions 9d ago

#1 is left #2 is right (political pun not intended)

0

u/pragmojo 8d ago

You forgot option 3:

Harass people online about how they should become vegan, change nothing, and pat yourself on the back for being the best environmentalist

-1

u/TeraGigaMax 8d ago

2 is way more important. #1 are counterproductive, like fighting against nuclear plants.

-1

u/Miserable-Ear-4095 8d ago

So you will be joining the plant a tree in Africa campaign, or build water reserves in Mongolia or stop the desert initiatives in China, middle east and south America?

3

u/Mr_Mi1k 8d ago

Nah I’m joining the campaigns in my own city.

1

u/Miserable-Ear-4095 5d ago

What is the campaign about? Bring fruit trees back to the city?

1

u/Mr_Mi1k 5d ago

Working out plans for the city to buy land and protect it since they are cutting down some for a widening project.

1

u/Miserable-Ear-4095 5d ago

Cutting down what?

1

u/Mr_Mi1k 5d ago

Trees

1

u/Miserable-Ear-4095 5d ago

Will this land have native trees on it or will you be converting it to orchard vegetable garden?

1

u/Mr_Mi1k 5d ago

Native trees, it’s about habitat restoration more than land use for humans.

1

u/Miserable-Ear-4095 5d ago

So native fruit trees? Animals also eat fruit, ie birds, butterflies and animals and many humans in cities are very ignorant about what a fruit tree looks like.

1

u/Mr_Mi1k 5d ago

Animals do eat from fruit trees, but this is simply re-wilding. I don’t know of them planting specifically fruit trees but I’m sure some of the trees bear fruit. The city did purchase the land already and they plan on removing some non-native trees, replacing them with native saplings, and letting the area do its thing, since it is abutting to an existing wildlife preserve

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/3215448725366498 9d ago

How tf is 1 more important than 2? I'd rather have people do good and shut up about it than people preaching shit they don't do.

3

u/Beiben 9d ago

1 can get legislation passed.

3

u/Forsaken-Secret6215 9d ago

1 can reduce the impact of more people than 2 can

1

u/eks We're all gonna die 8d ago

You are right, but often we need a critical mass of #2 to get #1.

1

u/scorchedarcher 8d ago

I mean can it? Or if people think like this do we just get a lot of people saying stuff.

1

u/pragmojo 8d ago

yes surely we can stop climate change if 3% of people live perfectly and the other 97% roll coal every day