Anonymous asked:
It’s the same logic as “there’s no point in voting while we still have a bad system” and it allows people to feel smug and superior about not doing a single thing differently than someone who thinks climate change is a myth
I do enjoy this new radicalism which preaches that anything that requires you do to stuff is counter-revolutionary.
I’m just saying, if you’re putting all the blame on individuals telling them their actions single handedly doomed the planet while you ignore the corporations yeah you’re a shitty person.
This is an argument I often see on the left, that asking people to change their habits, recycle, use less water, limit consumption, etc. amounts to “putting the blame on individuals.” I think it’s an interesting framing, because it’s more about how people are interpreting the message, not what’s being said. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an article about how individuals are to “blame” (which is a terrible motivator) for climate change, it’s generally more about “empowerment” via changes you can make (”Here are 5 things you can do to save the Earth!”) There’s a very reasonable argument that this tends to *obscure* the role of corporations and industry (and lack of government regulation) in creating and exacerbating environmental problems, and therefore minimizing the chance of collective action that would force a change in practices. I would agree that only focusing on individual behavior, specifically to divert attention away from corporate responsibility, is neoliberal bullshit. But much of this focus on individual behavior started as a reaction to data showing that Americans have, on average, a much larger carbon footprint than anyone else, and that our per capita emissions are much higher, though other countries are higher in total emissions. Sometimes we talk about individual behavior because not all individuals behave the same way. There are clearly structural factors that impact this (most Americans don’t have a lot of choice wrt public transit, for example) but that’s not all there is to it.
But I think this idea that it’s really about blame explains why some are so receptive to the message that in fact, corporations are the only entities that bear any responsibility, and individual behavior has no real impact on climate change. People hate being blamed! And leftists associate “individualism” with capitalism and neoliberalism. So they’re pretty open to the suggestion that corporations fuck up the environment for reasons that have *nothing* to do with consumer demand. They’re just out there, burning coal and polluting waterways, for the fun of it, earning profits, somehow, but certainly not from selling to consumers. So why should you change anything you’re doing? You’re not to blame! It’s all the corporations! And look, most of us don’t have unlimited choices. We still need electricity and gas and water, and we don’t have the ability to just not consume it from the one utility company that sells it, even if they’re fucking up the environment. But if you aren’t actually engaged in any collective action aimed at changing this status quo (which, I would argue, includes but is not limited to, voting for candidates who promise to better regulate industries), and just use this as an excuse not to change your individual behavior, and especially if you choose to consume at a higher rate than average, effectively you’re the same as someone who doesn’t believe it’s a problem at all.
Please read this. I’ve tried to articulate this concept a few times and just got so frustrated that I failed.
