The person you're responding to is asking themselves questions about the decisions they're making, the impact of those decisions, and if they can make better decisions to reduce the harm they might be causing. Is this so bad?
The purpose here is probably not to be a “better person” but to inflate their ego while belittling others.
What does it accomplish to shame drivers while simultaneously using AC and running water in the California desert?
If it were conversation about activism, I can talk about my engagement with the city council and contributions to relevant charities.
If this were a conversation about energy use in California I could talk about the premium I pay on my electricity so it is from renewable sources.
https://www.smud.org/en/Going-Green/Get-Green-Energy/Residen...
Reducing car usage is, in that journal article I referenced, the number 2 thing you can do to reduce your climate impact.
I have not misrepresented anything.
You’re right about the water. That’s something I’m still learning about.
I've encountered this sentiment many times here. It's a bit baffling to me, to be honest. Yes, we all know that personal actions are small compared to massive structural changes. But why exactly do you think that it's one or the other? I'd wager that the majority of politically active people trying to change things at a high level are also changing smaller things in their day-to-day life, because it's an issue that they are passionate about.
In my opinion, the attitude that you promote ("why do the little actions when only the big ones matter") is more likely to cause inaction, and the people I've met who espouse that viewpoint say a lot and do nothing at all.
Sure people should make those lifestyle changes where possible! I’m not against small change.
I get frustrated when I see people generalize the rest of the population as “abhorrently selfish”. Especially when their own lifestyle comes from a position of excess and privilege.
To clarify my position:
If you wanna make lifestyle changes for the environment, more power to you! I’ve got no beef with that. Just don’t use those tiny aspects of your modern life to paint the rest of the world as immoral.
Most car journeys are under 5 miles. Imagine the benefit if the majority of these journeys were made by bicycle instead! Public health from less air pollution and more exercise. Less stress, less traffic, less potential for vehicle accidents. Governments might even decide to improve pedestrian/cycling/public transit infrastructure and turn car parks into people parks with green spaces (which would reduce absorption of solar radiation and cool your city and clean its air).
It's a really simple proposal with many obvious benefits and no clear downside whatsoever. And just because it isn't a silver bullet you are all up in arms against it? Tell us more how BrianHenryIE is the actual source of the problem here and how you should still drive everywhere because of his equivalence to 100 farmers...
OP isn’t just suggesting that people drive less. According to him, drivers are “abhorrently selfish” and are directly responsible for death, disease, and need to take pay cuts and live in smaller homes so they can more easily fit into his little box that defines a good person.
I’m not up in arms about the idea of biking. I’m up in arms about people with extremely carbon expensive lifestyles claiming that everyone else is reprehensible for engaging in $specific_activity.