World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
There is some hope if we chip at it as much as we can. No action is too small:
If we convince ourselves we are screwed, we ll give up. Be the hero of your own story. YOU DO NOT NEED TO GET IT 100% RIGHT. Any improvement is improvement. We all live different lives, and the economy is hard on alot of us.
I believe:)
Edit: I get that industries/billionaires represent a majority of this issue. I also believe that change starts home. We gotta tackle this at every level, even if it seems lost. The alternative is watching it happen and wait for the others to change. This is a prime "tragedy of the common" problem. You drink filtered tap water? Well those plastic bottles dont get made, thrown away. Do this a lifetime and those bottles represent a hill of waste that never existed.
I m rooting for you, for us!
What a show of willful misunderstanding in comments. Thank you, and I am rooting for you too
Individual action won't fix systemic issues like major polluters being almost exclusively from industry but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take the suggested actions in any case. Just don't fool yourself that it is enough.
No way.. billionaires with yachts and private planes releasing more carbon in an afternoon then I use in a lifetime and I'M the one you think should wipe his ass with bamboo.. get the fuck out of here. Eat the rich then tell me I'm not doing enough because I eat a burger and use proper toilet paper
Individual action was a myth designed by FF companies to shift responsibility
Unfortunately, you missed the mark. The individual is not the problem and will not make an iota of difference.
Billionaires are the enemy. They are useless. They are pitting the average citizen against one another. There is no good billionaire.
https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/billionaires-emit-more-carbon-pollution-90-minutes-average-person-does-lifetime
12% of global emissions are individual car drivers alone. The individual is a sizable portion of the problem, and we need a multi pronged approach that attacks corporations outsized impact and reduces certain emissions from individuals as well.
There are over a billion cars on the road. Individually it is nothing and 12% is a small percentage. Where is the other 88. I'm sick of this blame the individual when companies are doing most of the polluting. We could stop driving all cars today and it wouldn't help. But anything to keep arrow going up. Only thing people can really do is consume less but that is a hard ask for Americans who consume far more then other countries.
If we dont support billioniares business', and turned "the individual" into an organized mass, it would work.
I dont know if this opinion, to change using amazon and the other big retailers, will ever come though. I saw someone legit promoting aliexpress for a product not too long ago, and I was surprised no one gave them shit for it.
If Working for and using, for example, amazon, was suddenly shamed and everyone stopped using it, it would stop making the billionaire at the top money. If no one buys the product, no one is willing to work for the company, the company would disolve. bezos still wouldnt be broke, or held to account, but this revenue stream would stop.
Will it happen though? I feel like a nhilist for saying, I dont think so.
No. Just no.
This is not an "individual action will solve this" case anymore. WE can't do jack about it, individually. If we get the corporations to stop doing harm, and the rich cut down traveling in their superjets, maybe then. But some schmuck driving a Toyota corolla a few hundred miles on a vacation, or taking a commercial passenger jet on a vacation with 100-some-odd people isn't the problem here.
Significant parts of the global climate usage are directly tied to individual actions. 12% is consumer car driving alone. So yes, the schmuck driving a Toyota Corolla is making a significant impact. The sooner you realize that the better, we need action on both corporation and end users.
There are about 1.5 billion of total cars + buses + trucks in this world. Even if we assume only 1 billion of them are consumer cars (which is already a VERY conservative estimate), all of them combined make 12% impact, so that schmuck driving a Toyota Corella would contribute less than 0.000000012% of the global climate change.
Significant my ass.
Climate change is a phenomenon happening on planetary scale, so the impact of individuals are always going to be astronomically small. This is a crisis that requires nation-state or mega-corp scale of efforts, and blaming individuals for the failure of nation-states and mega-corps on what they should be held responsible for, is extremely disingenuous.
Consuming less would effect the corporation a though.
The bidet gang would like a word with you.
(Seriously though: I agree that every action counts, but I also think that, even if the majority of the population followed that list perfectly, the globalized corporate structure would still be operating in such a way that the personal impact wouldn't be noticeable. When agriculture produces more than what's sold, they have no issue dumping the items that don't sell into the ground. Clothing outlets will shred unsold merch instead of giving it away. The waste is built into the system and a structural change is needed NOW if we are to survive.)
If there was a decline in consumption of climate harming products, large enough that these companies could see it in thier financial reports, I cant believe it wouldnt have any effect on the market.
Youre points are valid, and I agree with them, but if a majority wanted to (ideally, and I dont think they will) I think "voting with our wallet" would work, it is simple, but not practical because humans seem to love convience.
Correct. Convenience is just too important. Also status symbols because people just want to be seen as big/successful/important/.... regardless if that damages things.
The population grew 4 billion in the last few decades. Climate damaging corps that undercut the cost of responsibly produced products will still win out unless there's regulation that forces them to be responsible. Snapple shifted from glass to plastic bottles. It's simply cheaper to ship plastic with less damages, as an example.
You could have half of the world population buying responsibly, but these companies will still do large scale damage from the other half.
Lol. I don't think anyone reading this is going to stop the minimal traveling they do in the short breaks from The Grind that they get while dipshit rich people are yachting and jetting all over the planet. And they shouldn't. Average people shouldn't have to give up any travelling whatsoever because their budgets prevent them from doing enough to actually cause significant harm anyway. We need to use force to make the real culprits adjust their habits.
Other than that I fully agree.
If you kill a cat a day going forward and your neighbour kills two cats a day, you’re not exempt from blame and responsibility for the cats that you kill.
What you’re doing is feeling sorry for yourself and shirking responsibility for the harm that your leisure plane travel does to the climate and in extension to the environment and biodiversity.
Look up the numbers of how much CO2 emissions each person can be afforded to keep climate change and temperatures steady. Now try to factor in plane travel and eating beef while also living with basic amenities. Please get back to me, if you find a way to do those things while also not exceeding the emission threshold per capita, ie. not doing evil and contributing to our apocalypse in glacier speed.
and yes, more putting the onus on us, when all of our individual yearly pollution barely amounts to a day of pollution released by average industry.
You know it was industrial propaganda that started the whole personal responsibility thing to begin with right? to shift blame away from themselves and onto you and me.
I mean, yeah, you can make yourself feel good by reducing, but its doing fuckall compared to industrial release.
If people didn't consume so much corporations would have to change. But people need the latest phone, car and whatever else.
If that was true landfills wouldnt be filled at the end of every season with perfectly usable goods.
I understand the sentiment, but doesn't "the industry" essentially produce things that are for "us", even if indirectly?
Factories don't exist for their own sake, they exist to make an end product for people. So if you want to change that, we do need to consume less, like the parent you replied to said.
CEOs burning tons of fuel riding luxury jets does nothing for us. AI data centers clamoring for more electricity will do nothing for us.
I get what you're saying. It's a both are true type of thing in my opinion. Our impact pales in comparison to the ultra wealthy. What gets left out of the conversation is that the AI data centres, factories, and transport trucks exist because there is demand. Each and every one of us is part of that demand and by significantly changing our lifestyles we can change our demands.
Your argument is valid though, the wealthy need to be the first to reduce their demand and by the most. Also that they're not going to do that without the threat of state violence, just like we're obligated to be lawful on the threat of state violence. It's just that we're not absolve of our contribution to climate change because the ultra wealthy have contributed more.
The point I poorly made, is that it's capitalists/capital interests, the uber rich and techno-fascists that are clamoring for AI. It's not "EVERYONE."
Demand for a thing doesn't mean that the poor and rich are demanding the thing equally.
The point I poorly made was the uber rich, and their greed are driving global warming far more than your average person.
I recycled like a good little soldier through the 80's, 90's, 2000's, 2010's and early 2020's, only to find out that much of our plastic waste was just sold to third world countries rather than ACTUALLY being recycled. I've eliminated plastic everywhere I can in my life, and reuse it until it degrades and it's got to be tossed.
I keep my thermostat set at 62 in the winter, and 78 in the summer to reduce my demand for electricity, even though these aren't comfortable temperatures, they are tolerable. I already eat a primarily vegetarian diet, not because I want to, but because I am being priced out of meat. I repair my shoes and clothes to get a second life out of them. I don't own a car and ride a bicycle. (Before I moved closer to work I'd average 45 miles a day between commute and errands on the way home.)
Corporate interests have actively hampered transitions to greener energy and public transportation, and bicycle infrastructure, (at least in the USA where I am.)
The point I am trying to make here is that the poor, and lower middle class don't have large footprints to begin with, and have reduced consumption due to inflation and shit pay. Corporate interests and the uber wealthy are the biggest drivers of climate change.
Frankly, I'm tired of the powers that be trying to make me feel shame for fucking breathing because they think it contributes to global warming.
I don't think you should think about it in terms of blame, I think that's a big part of the propaganda. Seeding of anger, frustration, and apathy. Rather than allowing empowerment, organizing, and hope.
Blame should only be reserved for those that act with careless disregard. And doing things that are good for the environment shouldn't be seen as 'paying back'. You are actively doing more than you should and letting your actions speak louder than your words. And those actions can (and should) be part of building the collective that will force those truly responsible from stopping.
That's my one wish for lists like OP posted. It should always contain that the only lasting change is organizing.
"I don't think I'll super size it after all", I saw as I drive past the MegaCity One GigaChad data center.
The judge dredd universe is better then ours. The government has actually taken steps to address the housing crisis.
Sure, we can do that, but keep in mind that unilateral individual actions will not make the difference, all you can do is trying to create more broad awareness, form coalition and support for tighter laws and regulation, in order to have meaningful effect.
Also avoid blaming or moralizing individuals for their own choices, this will cause fatigue and infighting, which will distract from focus on policy change.
Your first point is so huge IMO. If you can't enjoy being at your own home then trying to have some kind of fulfilling life is going to be a steeper uphill battle than it already was.
Look at it like the Buddhists and stoics. Thinking your happiness is out there waiting on some beach, or in some fancy car or McMansion, is only going to perpetuate your suffering in the actual real now.
Or put another way, if you decide to find happiness and fulfillment in your home and your local community, and it works, then THEY can't stop you. Whoever that is in your case.
Been on the dating apps recently. The number of people who present "travel" as their entire personality is unsettling. Every photo somewhere exotic, every prompt answer is about traveling. It makes me wonder what they're all running from. I don't disagree that vacationing can be enjoyable, but there's more to life.
And don't get me started on the people who try to say that "traveling" is different from "vacationing" and that what they're doing is travelling and not vacationing. Egads.
I bet it's some of what you said, and maybe some of the well-known "buy experiences, not things" saying.
I'm not suggesting that saying is wrong, but I think people can mechanically go through the process of acquiring fancy-looking experiences because that is what you're SUPPOSED to do, just like people can collect fancy-looking posessions on auto pilot because that's what it means to be a successful person.
The last thing you said about people who claim they are "traveling" and not "vacationing" just REEKS of a hollow charade trying to prove that they are part of the upper crust of society.
The catch in all this is that we all have our own individualized needs, and a big part of the self-care work we need to do is figuring out what those things are. Like traveling and having fun vacations is awesome, but for most of us it's not going to be some instant key to life fulfillment. In my case, have always loved nature in general and aquatic life in particular. Some of my best vacation memories are swimming in little pockets of the ocean that looked like giant aquariums full of colorful fish and corals. But that's a rare occurrence and I will also never want to live somewhere tropical. Solution? I built a nice koi pond in my little back yard (in addition to all the other pets my family has). And in addition to the whole "caring for and interacting with water critters" angle, I got to do a lot of learning about chemistry and biology that are nowhere near my professional field, and I got to do a lot of DIYing, and I got a lot of exercise and fresh air out of it too! It helped much more than just my brain.
Prolly they all live in a big city. And living in a big city sucks ass, but most people have no choice because that's where the jobs are. I luckily live outside a big city in small village with forests and fields around me. But still near enough a medium-sized city so that I don't have to commute for ages. But I see that not everyone can live in places like mine, so the big city it is, where it is loud and full. Kinda understandable that u want to get away from it, then. But yeah, it doesn't mean that u need to fly to other side of the earth to do vacation, usually your own country has enough pretty spots to spend ur vacation.
Jevon’s Paradox
And vote. Pay attention to issues and vote. Don’t get caught up in a single issue, or voting with emotions or spite: vote for your future
I appreciate you. Thank you for posting that thoughtful and insightful comment.
You're awesome.
Taylor Swift's jets alone cancel out any benefit all of your steps might have for a few million or hundreds of millions of people.
It's wonderful to want to try to do something about this, but the only real way we have to do something about it is to stop the people and corporations who are the actual biggest contributors to the issue.
I'm thinking less along the lines of voting and more along the lines of stabbing.
Come on. You're off by multiple orders of magnitude. No, a single private plane is not offsetting millions or hundreds of millions of people living more sustainably. I'm genuinely not sure if you're this clueless or just trying to manipulate opinions.
Plus, emissions are additive, so you can avoid your own emissions, while doing what you can to keep billionaires in check.
I tend of assume someone being off thousands of orders of magnitude about something is using hyperbole. You didn't even mention the possibility. Seeing one example of an incorrect ratio and leaping clear to being torn between deciding if the person who said it is a complete idiot or some insidious evil force manipulating folks is enough to qualify you to wear a cape.