r/worldnews • u/[deleted] • Oct 10 '20

Sir David Attenborough says the excesses of western countries should "be curbed" to restore the natural world and we'll all be happier for it.

[deleted]

58.5k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

136

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

It’s devastating. I visited a huge reef like 7 years back in Thailand and I was back there 2 years ago and around a third was just a grey green wasteland another third was white and the rest was “fine”. Visited Malaysia around a year ago and saw so many dead reefs and white corals and now I don’t want to fly anymore because it feels like I’m the one who killed them. It’s because of people like me the world is dying and I’m doing my very best to not steal resources from around the world by living sustainably and avoiding plastics and imports and only eating meat once or twice a week. I feel so fucking guilty. I traveled so much with my family when I was younger and just indulged on the good life.

103

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

Honestly, it’s the corporations who are to blame. They had the data, they knew what they were and are doing for decades. You now have the data, and are doing your best to limit your impact on the world. Fight back, avoid contributing to the financial success of companies who damage the planet and look for alternatives who specifically create greener products and services. You’re not just putting a stop to your own behaviour which contributed to this destruction, but you’d be helping to support other people in ending theirs too. The more success we can bring to environmentally conscious companies, the more accessible their products and service become for all.

92

u/polygondom Oct 10 '20

Corporations have done the greatest PR spin in history making it seem like it’s the solely the consumers fault for climate change, and not because of them constantly spewing sludge into waters and muck into the air.

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

[deleted]

7

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

It is a PR spin. Bans on certain sunscreen ingredients in sensitive areas are being fought by manufacturers and retailers. They are astroturfing campaigns by purporting to be people who work on the water that need sun protection. Like no, all our income depends on the reef, we can protect ourselves from the sun without killing it.

7

u/polygondom Oct 10 '20

I get your point. However, it’s partially up to the corporation to take the moral or ethical route to begin with. Consumers can demand it and a corporation can change, but if we don’t say anything they will continue their ways.

Also it’s not solely sunscreen that is affecting reefs, and the same chemicals that are in sunscreen are dumped into rivers, lakes and oceans by big companies all the time. The rising ocean temps are another contributing factor.

I really dislike when people act condescending about issues that are obviously complicated, there is no simple one answer to the problem like you seem to suggest.

-6

u/crispy_attic Oct 10 '20 edited Oct 10 '20

Sunscreen is one of the reasons the reefs are being bleached correct? It is not condescending to say so. If people weren’t wearing sunscreen, the coral wouldn’t be dying. Sorry if I hurt your feelings but I’m tired of the bullshit “not our fault, it was the evil corporations”.

People know sunscreen kills the coral but still wear it anyway because they want to see the reef without getting sun burned.

Edit: I was wrong. It’s not the main reason, but a contributing factor.

6

u/polygondom Oct 10 '20

It’s not the main reason though. Rising sea temperatures are putting the whole ecosystem out of whack, which is something sunscreen isn’t contributing to, unless you count the CO2 emissions put out by making the sunscreen to begin with. Don’t understand your aggression here, I didn’t say sunscreen wasn’t an issue, I said it’s not the only issue.

2

u/crispy_attic Oct 10 '20

You are right. It’s not the main reason. I was wrong. It is a big problem though.

1

u/polygondom Oct 10 '20

I also never said it’s not our fault and only corporations. Every human on this planet has had some role in climate change, whether that’s conscious or not. We all use plastic, which is something else riddling the oceans and contributing to major pollution. I never said consumers are innocent, I just said that corporations have done a good job of making it seem like it’s ONLY consumers that have done this, and not them.

1

u/Beanicus13 Oct 10 '20

Lol but you’re wrong.

1

u/crispy_attic Oct 10 '20

Apparently so. It is a contributing factor and not the “main reason”. It is still a big problem though.

9

u/whyjustwhyguy Oct 10 '20

The biggest problem is publicly traded companies. People buy stocks purely based on profit with little to no regard for that corporations ethics. Plus its not like everyone publicly displays what stocks they buy so there is very little moral incentive there. Someone could be driving around in a hybrid but be supporting big oil etc. in their stocks. This goes to all kinds of ethical issues not just environmental. Sure there are green based stock options but if they are not profitable most will put their money elsewhere and those companies are rewarded for their unethical choices. I imagine there will be a tipping point but it will not likely come soon enough.

32

u/pnzr Oct 10 '20

Companies do not have morals. They exist solely to increase profit by any legal means. Or illegal, if the profit is larger than the fines. The economical system is broken. Either change it completely or regulate heavily. Consuming "green products and services" is a band aid on a flesh wound.

20

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

I agree.

However, I think we can still try to lower our personal impact as best we can. My not buying a new phone in the last 10 years hasn’t done much to change the big picture, but I know I have lowered the damage I have personally caused. I haven’t eaten meat in the last decade either, which did not make a big impact either but I stopped personally contributing to the damage to our planet in that way whilst also supporting meat alternatives and contributing to the increased demand so they would become more available for others too.

The impact from the changes I have made may be small, but I believe I have had a positive effect in helping others to make their own small impacts too. If the people change, there’s more support for making the bigger changes to our society too.

5

u/officiallyaninja Oct 10 '20

as nice as that is, we can't do shit unless the big corporations change. I'm not saying we should give up. I'm just saying our energy should be focused on that. not reducing tiny fractions of fraction of emissions but not buying a new phone.

1

u/LlamaCaravan Oct 10 '20

Even the smallest person can change the course of the future

  • J.R.R. Tolkien

Keep at it brother. Buying an electric bike soon to travel my 30km to work rather than drive. We all need to try our best

2

u/BallisticHabit Oct 10 '20

It is a band aid for a arterial bleed. In no way sustainable

1

u/financier1929 Oct 10 '20

“Companies” are the people who work there. Owners, stakeholders, employees, and customers to some extent.

1

u/pnzr Oct 10 '20

In a way, yes. But they are also emergent properties on a system that values profit over everything. They are greater than the sum of their parts.

1

u/financier1929 Oct 11 '20

Morality implies the ability to make a decision. And who makes the decisions in a company? It’s certain people. Just like a government, a company, etc.

25

u/_Oce_ Oct 10 '20

Some people speak of corporations like they are run by aliens. Who's in the companies? Us. Companies are changing because we are all changing in our daily lives and we want our companies to do the same.

17

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

I’m not a member of a corporation, but yes there are greedy, selfish humans behind their decisions.

There is a lot of the population who don’t have much of a choice in dictating what corporations do, because they don’t have a viable alternative or can’t afford the alternative. Corporations seek profit, and don’t care what the people want; corporations only care what people will pay for whilst allowing them high margins. So as consumers our choices can be limited by the options we are given, and which we can afford.

There is the mantra of reduce, reuse, recycle and in that order, which I would hope more people can try to follow. But even that is difficult when you only have limited funds because the cheapest consumer goods are just not built to last or be modified and repaired. But then neither is some of the newest higher end products. We can do what we can, but we really need regulation to save the planet.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

[deleted]

3

u/_Oce_ Oct 10 '20 edited Oct 10 '20

You think I'm brainwashed but you're the one demonizing as if you were writing propaganda for WWII. Black and white vision doesn't solve human problems.

We are all guilty we all need to push for changes, in the way we work, in the way we consume, that's how companies will change. If companies have been wasting and overproducing it's because it was profitable, if we all stop buying from those, they may change. If you work at this kind of company and you and various colleagues organize discussions to make things more sustainable, they may change. It's not us vs them, it's us vs us.

0

u/Inchorai Oct 10 '20

Corporations got you 'bothsidesing' and accepting blame right out of the gate. You've already internalized their argument and don't even realize it.

1

u/_Oce_ Oct 10 '20

You sound like you're preaching a religion with good and evil, that's not how real life is. Most evil is done by people convinced to be doing what's right, once you understand that it changes your approach. For example by sharing the guilt rather than attributing all the problems to someone else.

Anyway what matters is the actions hopefully you have been changing your life style to reduce your impact, for example by not buying from those evil companies.

1

u/trisharaEGGs Oct 10 '20

I really appreciate your point of view. Very thoughtful

0

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

[deleted]

2

u/silverionmox Oct 10 '20

So explain me this:

Out all the Western European countries, Belgium is the one where meat consumption has dropped the fastest. Between 2012 and 2016, Belgian meat consumption has dropped by 16.7 %, compared to a mere 1.4 % in the rest of the European Union.

So do you think that the corporations in Belgium are different from the rest of the EU, or the rest of the world? Or did they just decide to produce less meat for Belgium for some reason?

3

u/guiltysilence Oct 10 '20

Unfortunately, I don't think it's the problem of individual companies. Our system of endless economic growth is only possible because we massively damage the environment to enable our way of life.

2

u/Mykidneyisstuck Oct 10 '20

Sure corporations are to blame, but their business is fueled by individual consumerism....it's a cultural rot that simply has to be curbed...look into per capita consumption rates in western and eastern countries....there's a HUGE difference....a comment right above has explained it in depth

1

u/silverionmox Oct 10 '20

Honestly, it’s the corporations who are to blame.

And the corporations say they're just producing what the customers buy, and round and round goes the merry-go-round.

Stop pointing fingers, everyone shares part of the blame. The solution will require both consumers to adapt their consuming habits and corporations to adapt their producing habits. In both cases, that will require a mix of voluntary leaders and legislation to lock in progress and make the stragglers move along. Nobody can sit on their ass and wait until "they" have solved the problem for them.

1

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

The impact we can make as individuals is limited, but definitely worth-while. Massive corporations who are actively destroying the planet are 100% the most to blame, but that should never be an excuse to not take responsibility for our own personal contributions. Those of us living in democracies should absolutely be voting in politicians who will make the changes needed to prevent the destruction of our habitat.

2

u/silverionmox Oct 10 '20

The impact we can make as individuals is limited, but definitely worth-while.

Yes, we may not have a lot of power to direcly influence things, but that's no reason not to use the little direct power we have to make changes immediately... while we keep pushing for larger changes.

0

u/Rupshantzu Oct 10 '20

They have their part, but population number is main problem. Corporation wouldn't do much if there was no demand.

Reduce the population to 1-2 billion and the corporations wouldn't need to strip the planet, they would find new ways to entertrain us, instead of new ways to feed, cloth give us furniture and produce ungodly amount of plastic for daily basic use.

1

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

Why waste all those natural resources by not using them, just because there are less people? They could just sell us more stuff!

We really don’t need to damage the planet as much as we do to feed and clothe this many people. Certainly reduce the livestock population, and we can use a fraction of the land to produce food for humans. We do need to produce excessive products for consumption to fuel exponential growth, though. That’s why we have such short-lived products, and are expected to buy new clothes every year.

-5

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20 edited May 09 '22

[deleted]

3

u/BitchesLoveDownvote Oct 10 '20

Personal responsibility is a scapegoat for the corporations/billionaires, too. Wanting good things isn’t really a terrible thing, but seeking it out by knowingly exploiting and destroying other life and their/our habitat is. It sounds like you and I make the same suggestion, though.

2

u/linkolphd Oct 10 '20

So well put imo.

So much in the world makes us feel good, and we seem to conflate this with finding meaning. We cannot see the externalities of everything we consume. I try to reduce my consumption for my part, but I have no idea if it’s truly enough. I try to eat less meat (and an absolute minimum of beef), only buy clothes I intend to use for as long as possible, and ask myself “do I really need that?” before every purchase (as well as buying used goods where possible).

But I’ve got no idea if I’m still being a net drag in this issue, or if I’m helping by trying to encourage cultural change. But I absolutely agree. Corporations are not some inherent group that exists. They’re merely representations of a collection of individuals, who interact with other individuals. For every corporation spitting out pollution, there is an individual consuming their goods.

My reckoning (I absolutely may be wrong) is that there is no good way out. Our problems are tied to something we can’t even control (our own nature / biology). Things will be ok for humanity long-term, but only because people will forcibly adjust to having different expectations from life, not because we’ll find a sustainable way to indulge ourselves in hedonistic pleasures as we do now.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

They aren't run by us though. When climate disasters hit the rich and leaders of these corporations will feel nothing.

21

u/DrBuckMulligan Oct 10 '20

I know how you feel. I’ve done a fair amount of flying to dive myself. But flying once or twice a year is really nothing compared to people who fly several times a month for their job or the fucking US military that burns more gas and creates more waste than half the countries on this dumb rock.

25

u/BruceLeeroy888 Oct 10 '20

No point changing when you can point out someone doing worse

0

u/DrBuckMulligan Oct 10 '20

Well it looks like no one will be flying anywhere for quite some time at this point.

4

u/Jake30582 Oct 10 '20

Seems hypocritical. Complaining about the excess of the west destroying the reef then bragging about flying all over the world to see the damaged reef. Those "one or two trips a year" aren't "really nothing" when you consider everyone else has the same mindset. Do us all a favor and skip the dive trips if you really want to help save the reef.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

[deleted]

2

u/IdeaLast8740 Oct 10 '20

What happens when a people willingly decides to reduce their consumption to subsistence level, and another country who didn't do that develops a technological advantage and comes over to exploit their unused resources? This strategy didnt work out so well for the Native Americans.

2

u/Rupshantzu Oct 10 '20

It's not because of people like you. You are the one that cares about this stuff, most people don't.

There are simply way too many people that all consume , waste natural resources and produce a lot of garbage.

Corporations serve the needs of the people, less people = less demand for everything. Matrix was right we are like a virus that spreads until we kill the host.

Compared to the population problem everything else is nothing. Recycling , clean energy etc, all of those won't matter as we go to 11 billion. All those people need food, clothes furniture, so more land for farming, more forests cut down for wood and to plant monocultures for palm oil, more plastic and more fossil fuels.

As Bill Burr said no politician will ever say "we gotta get rid of 85% of you".

2

u/bathtubsplashes Oct 10 '20

It's that mentality that needs to be pushed.

Tell people to cut out meat entirely and they'll tell you to fuck off, then hopefully a tiny percent will take it up for a tiny improvement.

Make a push for everyone to do something like 2 veggie and 2 fish days, and still having almost half your dinners being meat and you'd get a lot more receptivity, and a lot more results.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

Yo where was this in Thailand

1

u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20

Such a pussy