edinbruh ,

I feel like this argument is way too imprecise, to the point of being basically untrue. That's probably based on the average emissions or something like that, but people are not the same and "emission responsibility" is wildly different.

Imagine killing 34k exploited African people, the world's climate won't even notice that. On the other hand, killing 34k middle class Americans or Europeans would probably be a little more effective, but still won't fix anything.
Now, killing 34k high-profile megacorp executives would definitely be much more effective, but would also collapse some economies, leading to various climate unfriendly events (like riots, war and shit).

But the simplest empirical evidence is: COVID killed 6 million people and the climate is still shit.

Source: I made it the fuck up, I'm talking out of my ass

xantoxis ,

There's no need to kill anyone. As our climate collapses, that'll start to happen on its own

lugal ,

Don't do this, but remember: the richer a person is, the bigger the ecological footprint. You are higher on that list than you might realize. Especially ecofascists tend to forget that fact.

candyman337 ,
@candyman337@sh.itjust.works avatar

Yeah you know what would actually be better? Fixing legislation so that the 100 companies that create the majority of pollution stop doing that

DessertStorms ,
@DessertStorms@kbin.social avatar

Lmmfao, yeah good luck with that.. (hint: the people who own those companies also own the government who makes the laws, there is no reforming capitalism, it's designed that way)

Omega_Haxors ,

Even better than that is changing the system so the 100 companies are no longer around to create a majority of pollution.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • science_memes@mander.xyz
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •