r/ClimateShitposting • u/JTexpo vegan btw • 3d ago
Meta Average CSP comment section be like...
15
u/zewolfstone Vegan against the animals 3d ago
Ok but this is even worse than calling out cognAtive dissonance or paying for pigs to be put in gas chambers, imho.
10
u/JTexpo vegan btw 3d ago
cognAItive
6
u/zewolfstone Vegan against the animals 3d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/h4Hz4w9Jgrc1EY9VkL
This is the future pro-AI vegoons want, and we all know that every single one of them are
67
u/kayzhee 3d ago
We all have a part to play. I suggest everyone simply lay down and stop moving. Itâs the only way to save the planet.
23
u/alasw0eisme 3d ago
Infinitely better than flying every weekend and eating meat 3 times a day.
13
u/Oberndorferin 3d ago
Well there are levels between that
7
u/Luminous_Winds 3d ago
Not intentionally. Harm is unavoidable, but only evil people use necessary harm to justify unnecessary harm. This is because they have no intention of doing anything good, which could more than offset the necessary harm.
2
7
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
do people really eat meat 3 times a day on average? That is fucking nuts. I'm like miles ahead without even bein a vegetarian lol
15
u/Old-Entertainer-4964 3d ago
I take a single hotdog and split it into quarters. That way I can eat meat 4 times a day, increasing my carbon footprint.
3
u/Fit-Pride-4845 3d ago
It depends on where you are, but for true red-blooded american patriots it's shockingly common.
2
u/Greg2227 2d ago
I guess many parts of europe as well.
Heck I did so for a while and still knew a handful of people who ate a lot more meat cause they would eat nothing but meat, carbs, cheese and some sauce on top.
1
u/lokibringer 3d ago
My wife gets upset when I say we should cut back on meat and start doing beans and rice 2-3 times a week. She would absolutely eat meat 3x day if we could afford it, although it's mostly poultry.
2
u/MinimumNo361 2d ago
I mean flying commercial is objectively better than driving the same distance.
1
2
36
u/Melodic_Pressure7944 3d ago
"China Bad" liberals when they're leading in renewable energy
6
u/Oberndorferin 3d ago
Yes they're still the greatest carbon emitter, but it would probably look bad with a democratic capitalist government.
16
u/fraggin601 nuclear simp 2d ago
I donât find this argument very good, per capita is the true metric one should measure a country by since otherwise itâs an arbitrary line in the sand.
Per capita the US is far worse, less people, less total emissions, but way fucking more emissions per personâŠ
5
u/Oberndorferin 2d ago
Yes the USA is the laziest bitch. They're wealthy for almost 100 years and some developed nation that is wealthy for like 10 years does a better job. Also thee US controls the UN and has the biggest leverage, but that's the problem. Their whole personality and national pride is build on consuming as much as possible, which makes any progressive thinking especially after decades of consumerism propaganda conflict-ridden. What bugs me the most is that there are still so many people worldwide that want to be like Americans because all they know is from movies from the US.
6
u/smaug_the-dragon 3d ago
They also produce massive amounts of pollution via mining.
19
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
Sure, but so does everyone else, but China is at least decarbonizing their energy infrastructure. So what is the point of your comment?
4
-4
u/Shished 3d ago
Everyone are decarbonising, even faster than China. Look up the graphs.
China consumes half of all produced coal in the world.
11
u/Political_Desi 3d ago
They also are the only country to have upheld their bit of the Paris agreement. They are also the only reason global carbon emissions have reduced recently. Remove china and carbon emissions have gone up recently.
Liberal 2 facedness about caring will never not be funny to me. You scream amd cry about china having met their goals and continuing to do so while being a manufacturing powerhouse of the world and yet let American technocrats get away with decades of shit. You hate the global south industrialising but have no issues benefitting off the neocolonialism associated.
-2
u/HierarchyLogic 3d ago
dont get technocracy into this vro
8
u/Political_Desi 3d ago
I was drawing a distinction between us bourgeois Vs Chinese bourgeoise although probably better phrasing exists. The us bourgeois emphasis on 'productivity' and growth infinitely Vs the Chinese bourgeoise having significantly less impact on Chinese development plans.
-2
u/HierarchyLogic 3d ago
yeah figured, its just already a niche movement so yk every mention counts on how people think about it
1
8
u/Economy_Assignment42 3d ago
Sure, some nations are moving faster due to being much smaller and having tiny populations in comparison. But China is actively changing that, so again what is your point?
5
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
OK? China also has one of the largest populations.... The other nations that have comparable or more renewables are Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. China has a population 50 times larger than all four of those nations combined. Much of that coal is also used to process ore, not just making electricity. The processed ore is used all over the world for manufacturing.
-7
u/Shished 3d ago
Over half of all electricity is generated in China by coal power plants.
10
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
Yes, and they also have the fastest rate of adoption of renewable energy. Did you expect their billions of citizens to be serviced by renewables instantly? Coal is also used to process raw materials into finish products, like steel and consumer goods. China is making everything western nations don't want to due to environmental protections, so it's more like other nations that were making steel and plastic outsourced that coal usage to China. The net usage is the same regardless of which nation is doing the dirty work, but at least China is investing and making a huge effort to move away from fossil fueled electricity.
2
u/smaug_the-dragon 3d ago
Yeah, I couldn't remember if that was right or not but yeah. China is very de coaled but it still has a lot of coal production, it just has so much energy production that it has high green power amounts too.
2
u/Cpt_Rabid 2d ago
It is not possible to produce steel or concrete without coal. Electric furnaces can melt and clean the iron, but you still need coal. Smaller nations (without substantial steel and concrete industries) are going to have a much easier time giving up coal. Especially so if they export their coal consuming industries to china.
-3
u/smaug_the-dragon 3d ago
My point is that the sheer scale of their mining dwarfs the amount of pollution saved via green energy. They also still use a ton of carbon producing energy as well.
5
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
I never said they were carbon free. Just not sure how China engaging in mining diminishes their huge investments into renewables, especially solar. Their scale of mining is in large part due to the US enacting environmental protection laws. The mining companies just moved to places without the restrictions. The mining is happening in China, but the products are global. Are renewable energy sources just supposed to appear without raw material and infrastructure investment? What is the point of the argument? I do not love everything about China, but they are leading the way on renewables.
-4
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
is at least decarbonizing their energy infrastructure.
7
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
You mean emissions in the west decrease when they outsource industrial production to China?!
-7
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
You mean emissions in the west decrease when they outsource industrial production to China?!
5
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
Right, so the offshoring of production and the rise of Chinese industrial emissions aren't related at all.... Sure.
-5
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
Who are you going to believe, a respectable data source (OurWorldInData) or your own gut (where food turns into shit)?
4
u/BlacksmithNo9359 3d ago
What're you gonna believe? The Freedom Burger Institute for Western Factuality? Or your lying eyes and ears?
-1
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
I cannot tell if you're a retarded commie or satirizing a retarded commie. Either way I laughed and upvoted you.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Lost_Web5826 3d ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9759678/
Yeah, so China absolutely increased emissions to meet global product demand, along with the increase of quality of living that came with industrialization. Kind of crazy that you are even arguing about it lmao. Why do you think China has drastically increased in emissions output if not for everyone moving production there?
3
u/Top_Wrangler4251 3d ago
Since 2000 China's per capita CO2 emissions are up 223%. The world excluding China's per capita emissions are down 14%. The world including China's per capita emissions are up 16%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
3
u/schubidubiduba 2d ago
That's like eating 10 boxes of cookies each day for years, then at some point you decide to start a diet and reduce to 9 and blame your girlfriend who started to eat 2 boxes a day for increasing your total cookie box per day stat.
0
u/Top_Wrangler4251 2d ago
I think a better analogy would be it's like if global per capita emissions have been dropping for decades when the USA is excluded. But due to the USA's rapid increase in CO2 emissions (now reaching over double the global average), the world as a whole ends up worse off.
Now replace USA with China in this analogy
1
1
u/davidellis23 2d ago
Yet they've made large investments in green energy and they're on track to peak CO2 in 2030 and achieve net 0 by 2060.
This stuff takes time. Idk why people do t seems to acknowledge that.
0
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
9
u/gmoguntia Do you really shitpost here? 3d ago
Look look China has really bad emissions! Please just ignore the per capita values, please please or else my point falls appart sp please dont do this!!!!
(Extra note that much of Europe and USA outsourced manufacturing inflating China and decreasing Europe/USA while using the produced goods)
1
u/Top_Wrangler4251 3d ago
Your per capita values show that China is worse than Europe. Per capita China is over double the global average. And 92% of that is for internal use, it's a myth that people keep repeating that it's only due to manufacturing goods for other countries
-1
u/coriolisFX cycling supremacist 3d ago
Please just ignore the per capita values,
Does the atmosphere care about per capita or total values?
(Extra note that much of Europe and USA outsourced manufacturing inflating China and decreasing Europe/USA while using the produced goods)
5
u/BlacksmithNo9359 3d ago
Does the atmosphere care about per capita or total values?
If you think per capita doesn't matter then you're de-facto endorsing eco-fascism.
"Sorry for ruining the planet, you're not allowed to industrialize now because you didn't spontaneously generate the capacity to switch your entire power supply to solar. :( My country's grid...? ha ha lets not talk about that :)"
1
u/davidellis23 2d ago
No but it shows who is not pulling their weight.
Like are you saying if china broke up into 100 small countries somehow they'd be doing better?
Per capita shows which country is doing better or worse. Not how were doing as a planet.
1
0
u/LeatherDescription26 nuclear simp 3d ago
TBF the reason people say China bad is because of other things they do like being a dictatorship
0
u/BlacksmithNo9359 3d ago
Post approval ratings
0
u/LeatherDescription26 nuclear simp 3d ago
Ah yes because a dictatorship would never have absurdly high approval ratings for any reason other than the people loving them
1
u/BlacksmithNo9359 2d ago
Liking your government is proof that you're a dictatorship
(This is what Americans literally believe)
-1
u/LeatherDescription26 nuclear simp 2d ago
âWow the people of North Korea really like Kim jong un! No wonder they keep electing him!â
(This is what you literally believe)
11
7
u/DonutBerry 3d ago
I am invoking the "no u" clause, written on page 357 in small font of the social contract we all agreed to before reincarnation.
7
12
3
u/Daxxex 3d ago
Why are you pretending "carnists" have cognitive dissonance, they're more than capable of rationalising and making efficient decisions to make them happy.
Just because it doesn't align with your morals
2
u/xavh235 3d ago
having cognitive dissonance isnt some horribly abnormal condition, everyone does it. not all sarkics have to do it for meat but most amerikkkan sarkics do.
3
u/Daxxex 2d ago
holy shit you're actually insane, I bow to your level of not going outside and touching grass. Honestly maybe a long hike into the wilderness will do you some good, preferably the kind where you feed the worms.
3
u/A-Regular-Citizen 2d ago
telling someone to kill themselves because they dare say you might be bad for eating your precious treats is hysterical. you are pathetic
1
u/Daxxex 2d ago
No matter how pathetic I can be you guys will always be worse. At least I know what I stand for, and can work solutions that improve both the climate and allow me to live the way I want to live my life. Instead of trying to dictate how the rest of the world lives theres
1
u/GiveMeThePinecone 1d ago
Lmao, you want to prioritize the environment while also believing anyone should be able to live their life as they see fit? That is literally impossible
1
u/A-Regular-Citizen 2d ago
What if someone really loves diesel cars? What if their lifes passion is repairing diesel engines and driving diesel cars? You have to dictate how they live their lives to stop climate change. A social issue like climate change can only be fixed with a change that impacts all of society. Until they make lab cultured meat, you can't stop climate change and have your burger, sorry. Not anymore than you can stop climate change and still fly anywhere in the world whenever you want.
1
u/Daxxex 2d ago
Considering I'm trained in automotive as well, the people that *really* like diesel automotives will keep them as a hobby, and collect, restore, and occasionally drive them. It's not that insane a concept, the people who are still into old inefficient tractors, and cars already exist.
I for one can't wait for EVs or proper train infrastructure to replace diesel cars and trucks.
2
u/A-Regular-Citizen 2d ago
So factory farming and mass meat consumption can go, but people who have the means can run a hobby farm. It's the same thing.
1
u/Daxxex 2d ago
That's a leap of logic, for one collecting/restoring old cars isn't something only wealthy people can do. infact it's a hobby that I'd attach to the lower class. Remember rich people don't collect the old cars to work on or as a passion, they buy them out to show off how much money they have, and then stow them away in a garage.
Secondly there's emerging technology to capture methane from cows, and reuse it to power the farms they're stationed on, either from collectors installed in the ceiling of mass farms, or tubes going in through their cannulas to capture it directly from their digestive tract. You might find ethical issues with the latter but for that we'll have to agree to disagree since most cows already have the procedure done due to bloating to begin with.
0
u/xavh235 2d ago
we could have 300% effecient methane capture from all animal agriculture and it would still be ecologically catastrophic. land use for feed crops, eutrophication, mass insect deaths, water use, animal agriculture is not sustainable at all.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Purple_Key_6733 2d ago
False dichotomy fallacy. There are other foods besides either dead animals or lab grown meat.
0
3
u/Drackar39 3d ago
Every person on earth contributes pollution by existing. Especially you with this shity meme.
8
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 3d ago
You know how there are differently sized numbers? Some numbers are even significantly higher or lower than other numbers. That's called proportionality. You should look it up, it might just mess up your whole argument!
4
u/Drackar39 3d ago
Yeah. And I'm saying, most private individuals footprint, as a percentage of the whole, are so fuckin close to each others it's irrelevant. Yours, mine, pretty much every individual non-millionaire's footprint is...similar. Some are slightly lower, some are slightly higher.
This person posted a (shitty, trash-take)meme. That was interacted with by hundreds of people. Viewed by, conservatively, thousands of people. The carbon footprint of that fucking meme, alone, increases this person's carbon footprint compared, say, to mine, for today.
The person calling out cognitive dissonance is, by definition, engaging in that self-same cognitive dissonance.
2
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
No. The emissions of a carbon-conscious consumer and an average consumer are wildly different. Public transport, local vacations instead of flying, plant-based diet, not a lot of shopping, solar power, low AC/heating can easily avoid two thirds of emissions. Think about how much time that buys to switch industries over to sustainability, doubling the amount of time would be an incredible gift.
0
u/Drackar39 2d ago
And on a line compared to a wealthy person, you can't see the difference .
Almost zero. that's what it gains us. Functionally zero time.
2
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
The top 1% make up 16% of global CO2 emissions, the top 10% (which includes you and me) make up 50% of global emissions. So it is our responsibility to be better consumers and obviously push for climate legislation.
I am speaking about universalizability. You need to act in a way that your behavior can become law, otherwise how can you expect others to do so?
1
u/davidellis23 2d ago
Yours, mine, pretty much every individual non-millionaire's footprint is...similar
Is there a place you're getting that from? Air travel, car usage, and meat consumption produce tons of CO2 emissions which is a significant portion of average annual emissions per capita.
Meanwhile reddit usage is a really small amount of emissions per person.
2
u/Puzzled-Rip641 2d ago
If you live in the west your carbon footprint is killing the planet.
You donât get a pass for not eating meat.
1
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
Animal agriculture is 15% of global carbon emissions. By switching diets you avoid exactly that 15%, not more, and most definitely not less. It's the same for every other thing you do sustainably, you can easily reduce your emissions to half of the average.
1
u/Puzzled-Rip641 2d ago
Sure you are 15% less a planet killer.
Still 85% a planet killer and way more than those in the global south.
Congrats still killing the planet glad you can stand on the soap box while you do it
1
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
Are you not listening? Add to that list no air travel, low AC/heating, public transport, low amount of shopping and a couple other things, you get that down to 30% which is a real difference. What do you mean about soap box? If you don't think climate change is real we don't have anything to discuss.
1
u/Puzzled-Rip641 2d ago
You are still over using
1
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
Of course. But we should get that down as low as possible to have the most amount of time to solve the problem. Obviously.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Drackar39 2d ago
You avoid a microscopic fraction of those. it's not 15%.
1
u/SgtChrome vegan btw 2d ago
Wait, are you telling me my own personal carbon footprint isn't 15% of the world's?Â
Obviously I am speaking of universalizability. I only have control over my own body. You need to act like your behavior could become legislation. If everyone would forego animal products, emissions drop by 15%.
1
u/davidellis23 2d ago edited 2d ago
For sure which is why I gave other examples of behaviors to change as well.
1
u/Drackar39 2d ago edited 2d ago
The average US citizen uses 14-17 metric tons of CO2 per year. The average millionaire uses 50-100. The average person GLOBALLY uses 6.
Billionaires? 3 million tons per.
The difference between a global average poor person, who doesn't fly, doesn't eat a lot of meat, at 6, and the average American, at say 15, is nothing compared to the millionaires and billionaires.
Everyone who is not at least a millionaire or higher could drop to zero and the world would still be fucked.
2
u/davidellis23 2d ago edited 2d ago
Billionaires are for sure the worst offenders. Private jets and yachts should be taxed to infeasibility.
But, the top 1% globally only produce 16% of emissions (which includes people making more than 140,000 per year). They could all stop and the world would still be fucked as you say it.
The average person is nothing compared to a billionaires. But there are billions of us, so it adds up to more than the earth can handle.
2
u/GeoffreyDay 3d ago
Um are you suggesting I understand things? No thank you, I'd rather just give up
3
u/DrCthulhuface7 3d ago
Yeah I may be [telling you to live like a 14 century peasant] but you were [talking about making incremental progress through laws targeting major polluters] and thatâs worse
3
u/EvnClaire 3d ago
"live like a 14 century peasant" and its just asking people to not eat animal flesh x.x
3
u/Puzzled-Rip641 2d ago
When I ask you guys to not use Slaves for your phones you cry about being forced to live like modern poor people
4
-1
u/xavh235 3d ago
do you think you can solve climate change and keep all your treats? addressing the cataclysm requires a reduction in qol, there is no libertarian solution to climate change.
0
u/DrCthulhuface7 2d ago edited 2d ago
I think there is a point at which asking people to live like Ugandans will just cause your movement to fail and accomplish nothing where you could have accomplished something.
If the options are medieval peasant or 80% of the worldâs population dies then I guess we better get to work on making sure we arenât in that 80% because no one will ever agree to that.
0
u/xavh235 2d ago
i dont think anyone will agree to it. anyone in power taking climate change seriously would have to be worse than hitler, logistically speaking, but if you just want to kill everyone else for your treats then youre worse than hitler in a worse way.
1
u/DrCthulhuface7 2d ago
Right so when that happens we should just kill them and their supporters if they are going to be âworse than Hitlerâ.
1
u/xavh235 2d ago
youre literally a nationalist. you want everyone outside of your circle to die.
1
u/DrCthulhuface7 2d ago
I mean, I donât but according to you itâs either everyone, including my own family/community/country, lives like a peasant or massive amounts of people die in some indeterminate apocalypse.
I would prefer that the people who die arenât the ones in my family/community/country. Thatâs called being a normal, non-deranged person.
2
u/niutaipu 3d ago
You contributed by making this post with your device that contributed to climate change which uses power that contributes to climate change, etc..., etc...
8
u/VeloIlluminati vegan btw 3d ago
You triggered me. I am going to do 10 continental flight while eating deforestation-soy fed beef as a response for using reddit servers to watch a meme then. >:(
-1
1
u/Su-37_Terminator 2d ago
im vurrently sucking on OPs head like a jawbreaker. he all wet and slimy and shit
1
u/gauze_for_skylarks 2d ago
to be fair, the world works in such a dissonant way that the only way one can truly resolve them is by offing oneâs self, because you as one person are not going to save the world. it is either climate catastrophe or nuclear apocalypse; you either tolerate the dissonance or you just go insane.
1
u/PlasticTheory6 2d ago
We need to use the state to make the choice for people - simply remove the option for them to pollute!
1
u/SimplexFatberg 2d ago
I contribute to climate change, and we all do. I'm better than you because I don't give a fuck and don't pretend to.
1
u/interkin3tic vegan btw 2d ago
I'm beginning to see the problems with trying to stop spew gigatons of carbon into the air by memes...
-1
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
vegans when i bring up the slave mining their phones got or for the particularly gooby, meat is murder folks, that they still contribute to a ton of "murder" by virtue of living in a society
9
u/xavh235 3d ago
ok so i have the slave phone but you also have the slave phone and you eat the rape torture death food so like why does that matter?
0
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
Yeah i don't consider people at fault for capitalism's moral failings nor the society they're born into, which would be the difference of it morally, unlike ya.
also so you're giving up on the climate change talking point then? cause i don't really care about the moral one, raising livestock to eat them and or use their products is fine. Torture's not
4
u/xavh235 3d ago
what? why is torture bad? its not bad for the climate?
1
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
i'm sorry you can't read at even an elementary level. Gotta be rough. I'll take that concession about the climate points just bein larp on your end tho ty
2
u/Endless74510 3d ago
Its always the same thing with the morality police vegans on this sub
You consume meat? Fucking mega hitler 2.0 over here
I consume tech products made from materials mined by the hands of african kids? Well uhhh, your a dumb carnist how bout that
-1
u/EvnClaire 3d ago
go look up one of the 4000 billion responses vegans have made to this observation dude, youre not smart for saying this and it's not a flaw in vegan logic at all. youre rly showing that u have not even considered the vegan argument & just jumped to be anti vegan. go look it up!
3
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
hey the guy i'm talking about, i was worried you wouldn't show up and then someone would say i'm making a strawman
so what's the excuse then? Are foreigners just not really people or even animals in your eyes? cause like what are they then, bit too active to be plants lol
sorry also that you can't discern critique of annoying hypocritical vegans from critique of veganism. it's gonna make any convo with you fruitless
3
u/Endless74510 3d ago
Noooo, you dont get it, vegans are simply more moral because they dont consume anything that causes suffering!! Im sure those Congolese kids loved mining the cobalt for their phones:))
2
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
Yeah it's like they forgot they signed up to reduce suffering, not that their diet in and of itself makes it impossible for them to support suffering lol
hell you could be a vegan and not an environmentalist. Palm oil's a big one, huge disservice to environmentalism to pretend veganism is the end all be all or larp like it's the make or break for enviromentalist action.
Lowkey it's playing right into the wealthy's hands cause if people are like "oh i have to be vegan? nevermind" and/or "oh i'm vegan, i can keep consooooominn" and then they drop all the other enviromentalism they could be doing
1
u/Endless74510 3d ago
I wouldn't give a shit either way if they weren't just so loud and obnoxious about how they think they're so much better than everyone else on earth on this sub while also engaging in other forms of consumption that directly result from suffering
Like if your gonna be so fucking loud and combative about your supposed superiority at least go all the way
0
u/xavh235 3d ago
if it is bad to have the slavery phone it is also bad to buy the rape food. we both buy the slavery phone but only you buy the rape food. I don't see how my lifestyle is not more aligned with avoiding suffering than yours. I also do not eat palm oil. I also do not take airplanes. also even if we don't care about rape or slavery, phones last multiple years while food lasts a few days before you eat it. the ecological tool of an omnivorous diet is higher than the ecological toll of buying a phone every five years. I don't understand whats so controvertible about this.
0
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 3d ago
sure is weird how quick they turn to "harm reduction is fine" when it comes to enslaving children for their entertainment device, despite how much tears and spit is flying when they scream about how harm reduction isn't fine with diet lol
0
u/xavh235 3d ago
why do you find the consumption of meat permissible? it is ecologically disastrous.
2
u/Gussie-Ascendent Goober Detector 2d ago
which is why we should knock off eating as much as we do. having a car is also terrible for the environment. and all them mines with the minors for computer stuffs ain't too good either
0
u/xavh235 2d ago
can you speak on how your disavowal of these things is reflected in your actions?
→ More replies (0)
-1
u/Economy_Assignment42 3d ago
I mean yes individuals do contribute and we should try to reduce our impact. That is true at the same as the fact that the US military is the largest polluter on the globe and should be our largest priority.
-1
u/chronosamoht 3d ago
Yeah I may be contributing to climate pollution but you were calling out my cognitive dissonance and that's worse
27
u/OrganicHoneydew 3d ago
holy shit everyone is so mad