I didn't expect anti environmental propaganda I see on Facebook to show up here
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
208 points (80.6% liked)
Comic Strips
12491 readers
3394 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- [email protected]: "I use Arch btw"
- [email protected]: memes (you don't say!)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.
It's a common talking point of climate deniers, so they can excuse their own inaction.
*Edit: speeeling
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 worse 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
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.
I think you're completely misunderstanding the comic... it's about hypocrisy, not anti-environmental.
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.
Lots of things produce lots of ghg emissions. Here's a breakdown.
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?
Alright, so I guess we should just visit local concerts that we can only access by bus/train, since it's putting less strain on the environment. All bands play in the same area, or at least in the same country (state, if you're thinking big, like the US or similarly sized countries).
But there's NO way people from other states/countries wouldn't want to visit their concert at least once. So every single concert, you would have people travel to your area from different countries, probably taking the plane. So now, instead of one band flying to places, you get dozens of people taking flights from various countries. Every single concert.
It feels a bit like ordering online, where there is only one guy in a van delivering stuff to dozens of households instead of those households driving to the brick-and-mortar shop one by one.
I'm not saying the current system is optimal. But I really wonder how else we could solve this particular problem.