"The drug cartels ruined me" said the junkie. It's easy and lazy to blame the big and greedy suppliers but demand will always create a vaccum that must and will be filled.
Assume fossil fuels are like drugs, why was the war on drugs not only unwinnable but made things worse? If that parallel is correct, consider the ramifications of this blunder being repeated on the climate.
They aren't just passive players who share equal responsibility with us normies for heating up the planet. They are active players, without whose involvement, we may have taken solid actions much earlier when it really mattered. They shouldn't be compared to the illegal drug mafia. They should be compared to the big tobacco who did bad things while apparently staying within the law. Let's not understate or dilute their culpability in causing the major crisis that is plaguing the entire planet.
> ...funding misleading news and propaganda groups that dismiss such impacts and influencing authorities to scuttle efforts to switch to alternative power sources.
But did they break the law? Is there corruption in the government or academia? Then start by rooting out that corruption.
You are missing the point! This is the same mistake the war on drugs made! You want to bring big oil to their knees but so what? Are you saying people will buy shitty electric cars or nuke powerplants will be built because if that?
If I was an oil and gas ceo, I would just quitely move my hq and business to friendlier countries and have non-culpable subsidiaries run US/western side of things but I am sure they have resources to eventually escape any significant damages beyond a few billion dollars.
The fact that the political system is manipulated by powerful people and compnies is rightfully a root cause here. I have yet to see anyone sue congresspeople or crusade for lobbying/academia reform. Do you seriously blame publicly traded money making machines doing all they can to make more money? They're not supposed to care about the climate, your politicians are! Your academics who are supposed to present information to policy makers are. In the end you spend all your time protesting and crusadinf against anyone but the people ultimately responsible for it who can make effective change. Oil companies work for shareholders interests, elected politicians work for you.
And keep in mind, big tobacco is alive and kicking. You can near bankrupt oil companies, they'll still be very profitable and the problem is still unsolved.
Their research was more about protecting their revenue streams. They took actions based on it - to derail public discourse and actions into climate change. That's reason enough why anybody should care.
> Shouldn't an independent organization be doing the studies anyways?
That too did happen. But there were so many instances in which such research was scuttled and their results discredited.
> They take oil from the ground and sell it, whether their customers want vaseline or unleaded gas, do long as it is legally permitted and they pay all the taxes, what other obligation do they have?
> But did they break the law? Is there corruption in the government or academia? Then start by rooting out that corruption.
Oh! So, now the argument is that they did all that just because the society is corrupt and allowed them to do so? No consideration for all they money they pumped to corrupt public discourse and institutions? And don't hold them responsible for their actions until all corruption in the world is rooted out? That's a very disingenuous and frankly dishonest argument that anybody can raise to justify misdeeds.
The fact that they knew about the consequences and the actions they still took to bring the world to the brink of an ecological disaster are well known and documented. I'm disgusted by the fact that people are still calling for giving them a free pass when we're realistically looking at bleak economic future and a man-made mass extinction event. The society be damned if we forget and whitewash the actions of certain groups that brought such misery to the entire planet.
Not society but government. If the US had strict bribery laws for congress for things lobbying by corporations (something I insist should be a constitutional amendment) this would not have been a problem.
The fact is legal is legal, no crimes. For civil damages you have to prove that without their actions meaningful policy change would take place (despite politicians still worrying about oil and car jobs among other things in their states regardless) and prove that the policy change would have had global impact that could have prevented your damages, this means proving they also interfered in countries like China, india and EU countries that pollute/emit more than the US.
But again, so what I ask? You get paid but will their punishment change anything? It won't even prevent them from doing the same things. Big tobacco just slaps on a warning sign, it took a lot of education for consumers and policy by various parties to drive down tobacco use, neither punishing big tobacco nor raising taxes and punishing users made the slightest dent, same with drugs.
Fossil fuel is an addiction and you folks are wasting precious years fighting the wrong battle, even if you win you still lose the war.
> I'm disgusted by the fact that people are still calling for giving them a free pass when we're realistically looking at bleak economic future and a man-made mass extinction event. The society be damned if we forget and whitewash the actions of certain groups that brought such misery to the entire planet.
It takes to to tango! It sounds like you want to punish them because they can pay money, is it that simple? Where is your moral rage against academics and congresspersons in that same vein? Were they innocents who were taken advantage of in your opinion?
You still don't get that big companies are supposed to look out for their own interests! They owe you no moral obligation beyond the letter of the law. However, trusted academics and elected politicians do have an obligation to look after your interests and they didn't.
If you trust someone to guard your house and they let a thieve in to take your stuff, should you not me more angry at the person you trusted? In this case the thieves stole lawfully and indirectly and they have fat wallets to fight with in court.
There is this classist/corporate outrage culture that is very psychologically satisfying but in reality isn't rooted in critical thinking or affecting meaningful change.