Poison ivy would argue we don’t have time for systemic change. She’s doing what is in her power to do. She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.
…but her actions don’t actually achieve anything other than fulfilling some sort of revenge/punishment fantasy.
The billionaire isn’t personally responsible for the emissions, and the companies will continue to operate without him. If we’re not talking systemic change (i.e. government-mandated, I guess?), then she needs to either target the businesses/facilities/supply chains directly, or convince the billionaire (or someone else with power in the companies) to change things.
The Incredibles movies are even better examples, IMO.
Edit: by the way, this part of that video seems like a nice rebuttal to link in threads where pearl-clutchers removed and moan about “disruptive” protests.
Well if they can’t convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire’s ownership. If not, there’s always the next in line.
He’s not directly responsible - removing him from the equation doesn’t change anything. It’s not like he’s a machine and turning him off stops the emission. The companies will still run and nothing will have actually improved.
Yes, and compared to the companies they run, even their emissions are completely negligible. Individual action will not fix our climate crisis, regardless of who does it. Systemic change is the only option that has the possibility of a statistically-useful effect.
She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.
Reminder that Ivy cares more about plants than people. She would consider tearing down part of your wall so the fern can get natural light even if it means you will die of exposure to be a perfectly sane solution.
Poison ivy would argue we don’t have time for systemic change. She’s doing what is in her power to do. She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.
…but her actions don’t actually achieve anything other than fulfilling some sort of revenge/punishment fantasy.
The billionaire isn’t personally responsible for the emissions, and the companies will continue to operate without him. If we’re not talking systemic change (i.e. government-mandated, I guess?), then she needs to either target the businesses/facilities/supply chains directly, or convince the billionaire (or someone else with power in the companies) to change things.
superheroes aren’t here to solve problems, they’re here to maintain the status quo
The Incredibles movies are even better examples, IMO.
Edit: by the way, this part of that video seems like a nice rebuttal to link in threads where pearl-clutchers removed and moan about “disruptive” protests.
Well if they can’t convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire’s ownership. If not, there’s always the next in line.
Historically this has had mixed results
How is the guy emitting a shit ton of emissions and being in charge of so many companies that emit even more emissions not responsible?
He’s not directly responsible - removing him from the equation doesn’t change anything. It’s not like he’s a machine and turning him off stops the emission. The companies will still run and nothing will have actually improved.
Habe you looked into the lifestyle billionaires live and how mich emission they produce compared to a normal guy?
Yes, and compared to the companies they run, even their emissions are completely negligible. Individual action will not fix our climate crisis, regardless of who does it. Systemic change is the only option that has the possibility of a statistically-useful effect.
Couldn’t be the one directly responsible for it, but he for sure is the one ripping all the benefits and paying none of its costs.
Reminder that Ivy cares more about plants than people. She would consider tearing down part of your wall so the fern can get natural light even if it means you will die of exposure to be a perfectly sane solution.
Eh, depends on continuity and the writer. This is clearly a more moderate version
So murder people for checks notes no benefit? That’s just an idiot.