just to maybe say what that other person said in a different way:
carbon isn’t emitted at the point of consumption, it’s emitted at the point of production. if you don’t buy a new phone or a plastic toy the carbon from its production doesn’t go away it’s already been released.
and before i say this next part i want to stress that boycotts don’t work except when paired with other more militant movements.
if you and everyone else stops buying a new phone or a plastic toy then the factory doesn’t close down and get rehabilitated, it changes hands and the new owners make something with less environmental exposure, like plastic pipes or mine detonator circuit boards.
the way to stop our emissions is at the point of production globally, not at the point of consumption individually.
What happened to circuit board assembly volume after people stopped buying blackberry phones? Cell phone ownership? Smart phone ownership?
The same plants that made rim components are making components for the phones we have now and production has increased. The mines that extracted coltan, copper, gold, oil and many more raw materials used in the manufacture of rim devices are still operating and total global production has increased.
Removing one product of a complex supply chain will not cause that chain to go slack. The market will find a place to sell its output and if there isn’t one it will manufacture it. If there isn’t demand it will manufacture that too.
We cannot stop emission at the point of consumption.
I didn’t say anything about a militant movement at the point of production (although I think it will be required when we tell the people making billions that the factory has to shut down or shift to something less profitable). What I said was that boycotts don’t work unless paired with a militant movement, which is borne out by the few examples of boycotts involved in successful struggles (Montgomery, arguably bds, etc.).
just to maybe say what that other person said in a different way:
carbon isn’t emitted at the point of consumption, it’s emitted at the point of production. if you don’t buy a new phone or a plastic toy the carbon from its production doesn’t go away it’s already been released.
and before i say this next part i want to stress that boycotts don’t work except when paired with other more militant movements.
if you and everyone else stops buying a new phone or a plastic toy then the factory doesn’t close down and get rehabilitated, it changes hands and the new owners make something with less environmental exposure, like plastic pipes or mine detonator circuit boards.
the way to stop our emissions is at the point of production globally, not at the point of consumption individually.
deleted by creator
What happened to circuit board assembly volume after people stopped buying blackberry phones? Cell phone ownership? Smart phone ownership?
The same plants that made rim components are making components for the phones we have now and production has increased. The mines that extracted coltan, copper, gold, oil and many more raw materials used in the manufacture of rim devices are still operating and total global production has increased.
Removing one product of a complex supply chain will not cause that chain to go slack. The market will find a place to sell its output and if there isn’t one it will manufacture it. If there isn’t demand it will manufacture that too.
We cannot stop emission at the point of consumption.
I didn’t say anything about a militant movement at the point of production (although I think it will be required when we tell the people making billions that the factory has to shut down or shift to something less profitable). What I said was that boycotts don’t work unless paired with a militant movement, which is borne out by the few examples of boycotts involved in successful struggles (Montgomery, arguably bds, etc.).