“ I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.” - RF
Climate change is readily increasing its burden on humanity. A direct consequence of INDUSTRIAL CAPITALISM, the rate of fossil fuel emissions is growing exponentially, beginning with coal then morphing into crude oil, cement and natural gas; since the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.
A growing trend in addressing climate change seems to be rooted in personal choices around consumption, inadvertently creating the ‘I’M GREENER THAN YOU MOVEMENT’.
Environmentalists and green activists alike have argued, rather emphatically, that switching to a greener lifestyle will save the planet.
A chasm between class and resource acquisition often complicates this advocacy, later reinforcing shame and guilt to those unable to alter their lives.
“ Shame should be reserved for the things we choose to do, not the circumstances that life puts on us.”
-Ann Patchett
However, recent information suggests that less than 100 corporations are responsible for more than 70% of global emissions, annually.
Therefore, I ask these questions: is advocating for personal choices that glorify a greener lifestyle actually helpful in addressing climate change?
If the answer is no, perhaps the problem is complicated by incentives that define INDUSTRIAL CAPITALISM, implying the necessity to alter that framework in order to address the aforementioned issue?