• MudMan@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Kinda, but I’m frustrated with both sides of the argument. There is a cohort of very online people at the ready to clarify how whatever initiative or proposal is “not it” or “greenwashing” and will not “fix” things.

    The activist argument is not so much that this is an ongoing thing we’re going to be considering forever, it’s that this or that solution is a corporate trap or a fake solution or whatever else. Often there isn’t even an agreement on what the “real” answer is supposed to be, just a willingness to be the savvy, jaded one that calls out the latest snake oil handwavy solution.

    So yeah, we probably don’t disagree on the first part, but that post really tickled my sensitivity to the second part.

      • MudMan@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        For the record, see the guy’s response below for exactly what I’m talking about.

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      t’s that this or that solution is a corporate trap or a fake solution or whatever else.

      Or on the other hand “the ultimate solution to all problems”. There are a number of solutions to cut emissions, giving people options is what makes the difference. Also, simply cutting emissions isn’t enough in many cases but get’s painted as “the solution”.