|
|||||
His e-mail subject was: Don't Blame BP |
Tags:
Notorious Dug's specious claim that he has no alternative but to pollute, rings hollow in our ears. Helplessly throwing up his hands doesn't cut it. Certainly he has alternatives...get a different job! Many of the rest of us have.
Oh, we are but a speck of dust in the sands of time...I just got here and I am tired of this rehashed subject.
So what makes us so special...our intelligence, our self-awareness? How does that differ from say, the dinosaurs, who had no clue that a comet was hurdling through space about to wreak havoc on the ecosystem? And the planet, it survived...it is not the planet we are concerned with, it is our own skin. Oh no the poor animals. We are animals and if it wasn't for that mass extinction, humanity would not have evolved. Nature is our biggest foe. So I say, just do your best :o) instead of pointing fingers 'no, its your fault...you consume more, your hands are bloodier than mine, I am better than you...'
or continue to fret, fret for your microbrews, fret for your wheelsets, fret for your iphones and macs, your fashionable socks, your grilled pineapple...hmmm how the hell did a pineapple get to Chicago I wonder?
LEARN TO SWIM
If you can look past the unfortunate subject line of the e-mail he's completely, 100% spot-on.
All consumers of petroleum have environmental blood on their hands, the more they consume the guiltier, and while BP needs to be held accountable (and I really don't think a fair person could read the e-mail and assert that Mr. Feinstein is saying it does not) it's not like none of us knew that off-shore drilling would result in a certain percentage of disasters just like this one.
I'm relieved to see there's someone else out there who recognizes that individuals can't just absolve themselves of responsibility and blame "the system" or "the evil corporations" with gleeful abandon without wallowing in hypocrisy.
Yes but the point is the same as the one that began this thread: We're each individually responsible for the larger effects of our personal actions. If you don't want to pollute, don't get a job as a truck driver...no matter how many drivers' jobs there may be. You ARE in charge of your destiny... Think Globally: Act Locally!
JKH said:Suggesting that someone change jobs is the biggest bunch of elitist bullshit I've heard in a long time. It's easy to feel smug when you sit on your ass in front of a computer for a living
As Clark said, we choose our paths. Nobody "makes" anyone do anything.
Can't respond to the bit about elitism or sitting in front of a computer without some effort on your part to frame that argument in a way that makes some sort of sense.
JKH said:Suggesting that someone change jobs is the biggest bunch of elitist bullshit I've heard in a long time. It's easy to feel smug when you sit on your ass in front of a computer for a living. There are jobs necessary for our society that require driving. Would you suggest that everyone that is socially conscience get a job that doesn't require driving? As a fabricator I manage to use a Subaru wagon for a job that most people use a full size pickup or van. I also schedule my work so I can bike about half the time. Should I quit so someone with a F-250 takes my place. I say if you are promoting career changes everyone in a cubicle should get a job in construction and use a fuel efficient vehicle. This would do a lot more good than most of the suggestions made here.
Not sure why you need to discount the effect of choosing not to drive-- it's the single most effective change most of us can make. The argument that you have to either reduce your ecological footprint to zero or not even bother is childish and depressing.
There's a report (which I've not read, because it is long and I'm busy) from the United Nations in 2006 that says that the meat industry produces more greenhouse gases than all the SUVs, cars, trucks, planes, and ships in the world combined. The reference is here. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things, but it seems like becoming a vegetarian is the single most effective change most of us can make.
Actually, the most effective change would be for humans to become extinct.
H3N3 said:Not sure why you need to discount the effect of choosing not to drive-- it's the single most effective change most of us can make. The argument that you have to either reduce your ecological footprint to zero or not even bother is childish and depressing.
Sorry Howard, I wasn't intending to condescendingly lecture you...but in rereading my post I can see how you might have inferred it. Perhaps not here in this forum, but usually when I tell folks I've given up my car, it provokes a "holier than thou" reaction from them. So I always add a disclaimer, that I recognize that I'm still a polluter...my original sin.
I actually think population control is our only long-term answer. With 7 billion people in the world, and another billion being added every 11 years, we will have many problems to confront in the next 100 years. Energy will only be one of them. But telling people to have fewer kids is more provocative than telling them to give up their car. Not to mention the religious and political overtones of that message.
H3N3 said:Sorry, Clark, I appreciate the backup but I never said anyone was scot free of anything and I find the implication that this would not have occurred to me condescending and insulting.
203 members
1 member
270 members
1 member
261 members