128
submitted 1 day ago by NightOwl@lemmy.ca to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 29 points 1 day ago

So basically any effort a single individual has done and can do in the future to reduce their footprint has been undone by 100x. Why are we even bothering?

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 day ago

the intention of the carbon footprint was to shift blame away from industrial polluters to individuals like recycling efforts shifted the onus away from beverage makers to individuals; adam ruins everything did an episode on it.

[-] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 day ago

the only individual effort needed is the one against the bourgeoisie, if you think you're going to save the planet because you use paper straws you've been brain poisoned by usonian propaganda

[-] pwnicholson@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

I feel that.

But just to say it: Because it's still the right thing to do, and if we didn't, it would just be that much worse.

There's no denying the best thing people can do for the planet isn't recycling, etc - it's voting.

[-] orc_princess@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

We don't have the time to vote every 2-4 years and pray we get a decent candidate that will at least not set us back further. We need to learn and organize.

[-] pwnicholson@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Oh, I'm not saying voting is the only thing we can do. Not by a long shot. It's just the most impactful.

[-] JustJack23@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 day ago

Of course a lemmy.world can't conceve of a political activity different from voting.

Let me help you there: read

[-] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 3 points 1 day ago

Yeah i do agree that it should be still done, even if just to keep ones surroundings cleaner, just the pretending that it has a notable impact is disingenuous, kinda annoying and misdirects attention from things that can have at least some impact, aka yeah voting.

[-] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Most of the described ecological and environmental damage is local to the regions being bombed as opposed to global impacts to air and oceans. Though there is some of that too.

I think it's safe to say that this unfolding disaster touches almost every aspect of life though, and it's all to diatract from Trump (& co) raping girls.

[-] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

Luckily, many Americans don't believe in it so it can't harm them........... /s

[-] MunkysUnkEnz0@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Just one of the largest super tankers, carries as much oil as was leaked in the horizon disaster.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

The world burns a super tanker worth of oil about every 20 minutes....

[-] minorkeys@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I mean Russian oil depos have been set ablaze for 5 years now and I've yet to see an environment impact report on it.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

In general, climate change (warming) has increased substantially over the last few years...

Inertia is a sumbitch.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

They exist. They are generally used to blame Russia for defending itself even if its the usual side that doesn't want peace.

this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
128 points (99.2% liked)

World News

39904 readers
554 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS