cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/10713443
For denial doesn’t only amount to rejecting the evidence, he argues – it also consists of denying our role in the climate crisis; absolving ourselves through “carbon offsets, hybrid cars, local purchases, recycling”. And in this, far more of us are implicated.
In some ways, this argument might not seem all that new. Multiple authors have pointed out that green capitalism, not rightwing deniers of the crisis, is our greatest obstacle to properly confronting the problem. DeLay agrees. The difference is the lens he brings to it – using psychoanalysis to explain the mechanisms behind denial.
It’s a coping mechanism if anything I guess, thinking we could do something to mitigate or at least delay the crisis.
The best carbon emission bang for buck would be making cities cyclable and walkable. The best long term carbon reduction investments per lifetime $ are by replacing car and flight intensive travel with rail, highspeed rail and bus transit, reducing our reliance on oil. Imagine if these “carbon offset” scams were instead grants to building dense, affordable housing units.
Even if humanity dies a horrible death due to our insatiable need to consume, it is better for our collective conscious to say we died trying to fix it rather than deny it completely, even if such distinction is futile or practically insignificant in the long run.
Cars are only the third largest aspect of our pollution.
Second is houses.
First is diet.
Incorrect, first is coal then cows then cars.
My mistake
So?
The cars are pushed as the number one thing because it’s something that only requires you to just drive less and puts the onus on car manufacturers to make more efficient or electric.
It avoids the #1 and # 2 factors because doing anything about those would hurt the economy.