OKay we get it it’s a bad faith classic, but it’s also true.
Swift talks about the environment yet flies her damn jet as much as possible
Swift is just an emotional support billionaire for liberals.
There are no ethical billionaires, and this includes Swift.
I didn’t expect anti environmental propaganda I see on Facebook to show up here
How is this anti environmental? It’s 100% true that a lot of environmentalist celebrities/politicians are massive hypocrites.
World leaders and celebrities took private jets to a UN Climate summit.
World leaders and celebrities took private jets to a UN Climate summit.
Would you have world leaders fly commercial? That’s just asking for an assassination.
Yes
I don’t quite see why. Their presence and actions affect the lives of thousands of people, and logistically doing the same with passenger vehicles is difficult due to schedules and fanaticism. The same cannot be said about 99% of people in traffic.
By bike even… passenger vehicles -even EVs are frowned upon these days…
Trains are gas-using vehicles, and not many mobility advocates frown upon them.
Bands transport lots of equipment as well as people that are often targeted. It’s not perfectly efficient to move them by limo, but there’s a logic to using something more than a bike or train.
I don’t even see people hate on vans or trucks when they’re used to transport large quantities of goods around a city. If the vehicle is at least somewhat necessary for the purpose, that can be okay.
Because it’s the “environment” flavor of this classic right-wing framing :
Just swap out “society” with “environment.”
The issue is the comic implies that a few celebrities who use private airplanes and busses contribute any significant percentage impact in the overall degree of pollution to the world writ-large…
…which is as silly as thinking making people use crappy paper straws will significantly impact plastic waste (when in reality, it instead has basically a negligible positive impact and instead provides easy ammunition to right-wing grifters who preach then how “they want to take away your good things to give you demonstrably eCo-FrIeNdLy alternatives!”)
In truth, the overwhelming majority percentage of pollution is caused by a handful of massive corporate actors… usually in pursuit of cheaper costs and exploiting labor… ie if a company makes a bunch of heavy stuff they have to send on a massive pollution spewing container ship across the Pacific because that company can pay a Chinese factory worker $0.02 a day, they will.
…But if we had things like international universal labor protections to keep companies from being able to exploit folks in 3rd world countries just to then ship goods producible within the native countries across oceans or penalties or carbon tax for having to ship goods on these massive cargo ships, it would provide incentive or punishment to stop the ACTUAL polluters responsible for the overwhelming majority of waste, pollution, etc.
So yeah… Facebook boomer💩.
Facebook people just casually ignore that we can do both too. This meme is definitely supposed to involve feelings of “stupid liberals” same as the arguments with EVs with “do you know where your electricity comes from hahaha stupid liberal”.
They never think we can do both. That is as individuals should start getting familiar with being more eco focused while also holding the heaviest polluters responsible. That they are not mutually exclusive.
Humans are fickle. In this meme we can say both the singer is good for promoting eco friendliness, but bad for being a large polluter. People don’t fit into black and white boxes. Facebook though, has completely monetized that theory
We can do both… but focusing on making fun of hypocritical celebrities preaching about environmental issues as a way to do nothing but market their brand image, rather than pressing the cause for making far more impactful change… is like saying “I really need to go find some meds to help with this pain in my shoulder…” when your arm has just been cut off.
Yeah, the meds might help and we should focus on stopping pain as well… but it probably would be more prudent to focus first (or at least primarily) on immediately stopping yourself from bleeding out and dying from your arm just being cut off.
Prioritize the biggest and most impactful targets, and if you can manage, do the minor stuff as well.
in terms of environmental, it’s a huge portion that is caused by the biggest polluters - but average humans combined also cause about 30-40% too. So I won’t call it a waste to focus on both at the same time
Yes… overall regular people cause about 1/5th of it…
…But like 57 companies do ALL the rest. Seems a lot more simple we just stop electing Rs and neo-libs, and get laws passed that stop the major contributors, rather than preach to people who - if asked to sacrifice more than they already do (and shouldn’t have to if we first just target the major contributors who can afford to sacrifice much more easily) - will be easier for reactionaries to preach to (for example, see what happened with the Carter administration asking for regular folks to “sacrifice” driving their cars then paving the way for Reagan to de-regulate further)
So both strategically and more effectively, we should target those companies with legislative efforts rather than shitting on Bon Jovi for telling people “let’s save the environment” right before he belts out another rendition of “It’s my life.”
Oh absolutely, the meme is stupid for sure. it’s just redirecting the public to think that it’s not a huge deal. My point is that we’re not “off the hook” because other people are worse. Even just at 20%, we should actively work to become greener, and those are incremental. Think about a heat pump instead of a gas furnace (or maybe a dual fuel). Think about taking the bus or walking vs driving. Etc etc."
However, the focus should be absolutely on the major polluters, those people are assholes and should be held accountable. In my book, things like the hurricane in Texas or the tornadoes across the midwest were directly because of the oil companies - and they should be held accountable for the destruction they allowed to happen.
It’s a common talking point of climate deniers, so they can excuse their own inaction.
*Edit: speeeling
I think you’re completely misunderstanding the comic… it’s about hypocrisy, not anti-environmental.
What if I told you that the reason I want to save the planet and conserve energy is so that future generations can experience the things that make humanity so amazing?
Like when your favorite band in the world plays a live show in your home town.
Saving the planet means acknowledging that certain things never should have existed in the first place.
Like musical tours?
Lots of things produce lots of ghg emissions. Here’s a breakdown.
