I feel tempted to agree, but something is not right. Where's the issue with this communication?
Factual level: Previous generations did not care. True, they did not.
Self-disclose: She is worried. And she is conscious of the issue. And would do something, if only she wasn't such a universal victim.
Relationship: She is superior to others, because at least she knows and worries.
Appeal: People should care and do something.
So, what is tempting to agree with you? Obviously the relationship and appeal layer. Nobody likes to be looked down to and commanded.
Yet, our generation and previous ones knew and did not care, and neither does this one. That _is_ worrying. So, if only we all acted local, would that change something globally?
The problem is the question. Our behavior is driven by our culture in many ways. Even if some dropped the ties, the majority never will. It is not a matter of weakness, but of social beings. That is why all cultures follow a trend, no matter how bad, until they hit a road block, an external event forcing them to change, all at once. All cultures did or do believe they were and are the best and last culture, even though since the birth of humanity all but the current ones were wrong about that.
Taking the desert home was a good choice. There is no point in escalation.
I'm really worried about this, because our lack of consensus-building is infuriating. We just can't agree on what to do, any climate change is a global problem. For example, Europe is the Continent that has worked hardest to reduce carbon-emissions: a French citizen is way greener than 20 years ago. However, this amounts to diddly-squat if India or China pollute more. There are only 68 million french, the impact is minimal...
I feel like many current problems stem from this lack of coordination. I mean, I'd be 100% behind a Universal Basic Income if it were, y'know, universal. But if only France or the US create a UBI, then it won't work and cause mass influx of migration.
Climate change is kinda the same, unfortunately...
All true, but Europe also exported many emissions to other countries, which makes finger pointing somewhat weird.
All in all, Europe loves to squeeze out more taxes from its citizens in the name of the climate, which tends to lower energy usage (or export that usage), but overall is not interested in actually doing something. That concerns both politicians and citizens. We buy new cell phones periodically, because they don't get repaired. If teenagers united, e.g. in Fridays for Future, to boycott manufacturers that build them as throw away items, that would have shook the market given their total budget for consumption. It did not happen, though.
You pretty much nailed it in your post in that said woman represents the majority and that includes activists.
When the natural gas crisis was new, I designed a 20 square meter solar collector for air heating and built it, making all calculations public. Nobody cared.
I feel tempted to agree, but something is not right. Where's the issue with this communication?
Factual level: Previous generations did not care. True, they did not.
Self-disclose: She is worried. And she is conscious of the issue. And would do something, if only she wasn't such a universal victim.
Relationship: She is superior to others, because at least she knows and worries.
Appeal: People should care and do something.
So, what is tempting to agree with you? Obviously the relationship and appeal layer. Nobody likes to be looked down to and commanded.
Yet, our generation and previous ones knew and did not care, and neither does this one. That _is_ worrying. So, if only we all acted local, would that change something globally?
The problem is the question. Our behavior is driven by our culture in many ways. Even if some dropped the ties, the majority never will. It is not a matter of weakness, but of social beings. That is why all cultures follow a trend, no matter how bad, until they hit a road block, an external event forcing them to change, all at once. All cultures did or do believe they were and are the best and last culture, even though since the birth of humanity all but the current ones were wrong about that.
Taking the desert home was a good choice. There is no point in escalation.
I'm really worried about this, because our lack of consensus-building is infuriating. We just can't agree on what to do, any climate change is a global problem. For example, Europe is the Continent that has worked hardest to reduce carbon-emissions: a French citizen is way greener than 20 years ago. However, this amounts to diddly-squat if India or China pollute more. There are only 68 million french, the impact is minimal...
I feel like many current problems stem from this lack of coordination. I mean, I'd be 100% behind a Universal Basic Income if it were, y'know, universal. But if only France or the US create a UBI, then it won't work and cause mass influx of migration.
Climate change is kinda the same, unfortunately...
Cheers
All true, but Europe also exported many emissions to other countries, which makes finger pointing somewhat weird.
All in all, Europe loves to squeeze out more taxes from its citizens in the name of the climate, which tends to lower energy usage (or export that usage), but overall is not interested in actually doing something. That concerns both politicians and citizens. We buy new cell phones periodically, because they don't get repaired. If teenagers united, e.g. in Fridays for Future, to boycott manufacturers that build them as throw away items, that would have shook the market given their total budget for consumption. It did not happen, though.
You pretty much nailed it in your post in that said woman represents the majority and that includes activists.
When the natural gas crisis was new, I designed a 20 square meter solar collector for air heating and built it, making all calculations public. Nobody cared.
So where do you see this going? Let me know if you see other options:
1) Climate Change is a hoax and nothing happens. Business as usual.
2) We escape climate apocalypse by building a huge anti-climate or whatever, machine.
3) We build social and political consensus and are able to reduce emissions and avoid the worst outcome.
4) We do nothing or very little, and the Human Species is almost wiped out entirely, knocking us back to some middle-age dystopia.
Am I missing something?
Cheers