A fixation on system change alone opens the door to a kind of cynical self-absolution that divorces personal commitment from political belief. This is its own kind of false consciousness, one that threatens to create a cheapened climate politics incommensurate with this urgent moment.
[…]
Because here’s the thing: When you choose to eat less meat or take the bus instead of driving or have fewer children, you are making a statement that your actions matter, that it’s not too late to avert climate catastrophe, that you have power. To take a measure of personal responsibility for climate change doesn’t have to distract from your political activism—if anything, it amplifies it.
But the thing is, money speaks to politicians. That’s why we’re in this mess in the first place. For example, we passed regulations on a bunch of forever chemicals, 3M successfully lobbied for exemptions and got a bunch of exemptions. Then they got caught dumping a bunch of PFAS and they say “oopsie” and pay a 10 billion dollar fine and everything is good again (for them, not for us). But they’re only doing that because people give 3M money. 3M only exists because of money. No money = no 3M. Delete these pieces of shit simply by withholding from them
Money in politics is poison, sure, and we’re definitely fucked if it isn’t solved immediately, if not sooner.
I was speaking in the assumption that everyone here would be on the same page about that.
A lot of people (surprisingly) aren’t on the same page and think that begging for policy change can somehow bring about policy change or don’t acknowledge the relationship of consumer and corporation in a zero sum environment. Best way to kill a houseplant is to just quit watering it, no fancy tricks needed, but it pisses a lot of people off to break it down as such