@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
“First of all, there is an attempt being made by them to deflect attention away from finding policy solutions to global warming towards promoting individual behaviour changes that affect people’s diets, travel choices and other personal behaviour,” said Mann. “This is a deflection campaign and a lot of well-meaning people have been taken in by it.”
Those individual behavior changes are the bottom line of what has to change to solve the climate threat. As long as you go on talking about regulatory changes without people changing behavior, the industrial lobbyists and lawyers and politicians will just go on finding ways to tell people that their bad choices are green to prevent them from spending less on petroleum products, energy, etc. by using less of it.
The general economic growth mentality is that the more consumers buy and spend the more money circulates and the better that is economically for everyone. They don't want people giving up driving and spending less on fuel, pavement, etc. They don't want people and businesses changing their thermostat habits to decimate sales of electricity and the fossil fuels that are burnt to generate it. They don't want people buying less meats and animal products, because there is an industry of pasturing and slaughtering animals, processing the meats and other products, etc.
Quote:Mann stressed that individual actions – eating less meat or avoiding air travel – were important in the battle against global warming. However, they should be seen as additional ways to combat global warming rather than as a substitute for policy reform.
Policies are created to assist industries in serving customers. You can try to reform policies to enact change, but there will be an enormous onslaught of lobbying to obstruct the change. Democratic institutions can be abused to protect popular bad habits against reform. That is the dark side of democracy.
Quote:“We should also be aware how the forces of denial are exploiting the lifestyle change movement to get their supporters to argue with each other. It takes pressure off attempts to regulate the fossil fuel industry. This approach is a softer form of denial and in many ways it is more pernicious.”
Yes, getting people to argue over plastic bags and straws to discredit really significant behavior changes like transportation reform, energy-use reform, and land-use reform are popular because they shift attention away from lifestyle habits that sustain the industries that don't want to change and lose money.