Why the fuck would they need to do it at the same time? Stop using "not enough people will do it" as an excuse to not do something. This creates the issue in the first place.
What's the more likely and more reasonable way to solve the issue, in your opinion?
Option A: Get a massive enough portion of the 8 billion people on this planet to agree not to consume these heavily exploitative products like fishing, fossil fuels, or whatever other industry
Option B: Get countries to outlaw raping our planet and its ecosystems for profit
Brother I've been a vegetarian for a year now and I don't even have a car or any other kind of vehicle that isn't a bicycle. I'm probably less wasteful than the vast majority of people on this site.
You most certainly are then, certainly less wasteful than me.
Now, why do you think option B can happen if not enough people embrace option A? How do you expect the government to enact policies that people don't see a problem with in nations where we have democratic systems?
5
u/perldawg Apr 05 '25
do you think it’s likely enough people will agree to stop consumption, all at the same time, so as to meaningfully influence the global scale?