930
Stone Rule (i.imgur.com)
submitted 5 months ago by poplargrove@lemmy.world to c/196
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] phuntis@lemm.ee 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

stop oil are industry plants they were founded by the daughter of an oil exec they're designed to make the real people protesting look crazy by lumping them in

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

“Please don’t shit your pants in public”

“I’m actually protesting climate change that means if you disagree with me you are wrong”

There’s a reason why the CEF funding these bozos is founded by a Getty oil heiress.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 months ago

From my experience capitalism and climate activism are incompatible ideologies. Capitalism is entirely, without a doubt, entirely focused on the bottom line. If it doesn't make them more money and/or costs them more money, they're against it. That's why something as universally bad as smoking took so long to be essentially outed as a problem, and something people should actively avoid. Just watch "thank you for smoking" for more detail on that one.

Cleaning up factory emissions and by-products/waste, doesn't earn companies any money. It's the right thing to do, but it's far easier and cheaper to simply dump the raw waste into the environment. Whether thats chemical runoff, or toxic fumes, or carbon emissions, etc. To safely collect and dispose of the by-products is an expensive process.

Any efforts from companies that are "green" is either that they can offer you a marginally less-bad (environmentally) product at a reduced cost to them. Whether that is because they passed those costs onto the consumer, or because the "green" alternative is actually cheaper, is the only question. As soon as the "green" alternative costs them more and they can't justify an increase in product cost for being "green", they simply won't do it. Anything outside of this scope is simply a PR stunt to try to gain favor with the more environmentally conscious consumers to try to pull them away from their current brand loyalties, over to your brand.

Pretty much all pr stunts of this sort are one-offs, to give the illusion of making an effort, while doing essentially nothing actually helpful.

Unless they can somehow make a profit from "saving the planet" then they won't do it. It's against their very nature.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
930 points (100.0% liked)

196

16542 readers
2254 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS