• noodle
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t own a car so I’m confident I’ve not killed anyone on the other side of the world, but my neighbour has a car. I’m pretty sure he hasn’t killed anyone recently either.

    But your neighbour’s car consumes something for fuel, which does kill people. No, he hasn’t mowed someone down. But the system for producing that fuel is exploitative, has been the motivation for wars, and pollutes the atmosphere. You can’t claim to be innocent when the system exists to supply the demand.

    You might not own a car, but you use electricity at least. Electricity comes from the grid that uses gasoline and coal at some percentage. Your computer and smartphone contain rare metals that are literally the product of mines owned and operated by warlords.

    In short, there is no ethical way to stay like this. As time goes on more and more some people will become sick of the middle and upper class acting like they shoulder no responsibility. That’s why we are seeing more direct activism.

    • mannycalaveraOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not going to change with green energy though. If we live in a world with clean green energy… we’re still going to use all the other things that you listed. Smart phones are still going to need rare earth metals, coffee is still going to be drunk, people are still going to want Nutella.

      I think what matters is the intent when you’re talking about “claiming to be innocent” and genocide. Otherwise pretty much everything we do in life has some negative consequence that affects someone else. We might as well stop living in a world like that.

      That’s very much not saying that we shouldn’t try to do better. Yes of course we should, as should the companies and governments that enable this. And we should be doing it quicker. I just can’t agree with pointing at random people on the street and calling them complicit in genocide.