queeranarchism:

spacekettle:

queeranarchism:

“The earth is not dying, it is being killed, and those who are killing it have names and addresses.” – Utah Phillips

Just 100 companies are responsible for more than 70% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. The guys who run those companies – and they are mostly guys – have gotten rich on the backs of literally all life on Earth. Their business model relies on the destruction of the only home humanity has ever known. Meanwhile, we misdirect our outrage at our neighbors, friends, and family for using plastic straws or not recycling. If there is anyone who deserves the outrage of all 7.5 billion of us, it’s these 100 people right here.

It sounds fun and all, but you do realize that it’s not actually that simple, right? Some ppl in the notes are like “kill those people, problem solved” but you do realize that these companies are vital to survival of milions of people, the way things stand now? Let’s take the Russian company Gazprom as an example. They deliver fossil gas to Russia and Central and Eastern Europe (for example 2/3 of Polish fossil gas is imported, mainly from them). Fossil gas is currently an important source of heat for houses. If the company stops functioning overnight you’ll have an international energetic crisis, and if it happens in winter it would pose a risk of a lot of people simply freezing to death. What we need to do is render them obsolete (and fast), fight for alternative energy sources to be used by countries worldwide. Sure, I can get angry at Gazprom’s ceo, but it won’t actually change anything - the whole country is running on this product. You treat them like companies like amazon, which is an error and it won’t get anyone anywhere.

i have enough outrage for everybody if everyone cut consumption they’d have to scale back production it’s on everybody whether they like it or not SEE THIS PERSON GETS IT WE NEED TO LOWER THE CONSUMPTION OF NON-RENEWABLE FUELS NOT KILL PEOPLE, WE’RE ALL RESPONSIBLE  but I think the main responsibility lies with local governments, since they have the power to fund building greener power plants

It has been shown again and again that individual consumption choices can’t fix the problem. You switch to green energy, but the company you get it from gets it’s ‘bio fuel’ by cutting down forests and shipping them to bio fuel plants on coal ships. You buy local food but it’s still packed in plastics made in the most unethical ways. The chain of production is not transparent at all, incredibly complex and far out of our control. Most CO2 emission is entirely beyond the reach of your consumer choices. I won’t go into every single detail, that conversation has already been had a thousand times.

Let’s go to the more interesting question:

If you could somehow kill these 100 people, would it change anything?

Well, it probably wouldn’t bring about a revolution. The change we need, both the destruction of the systems in place and the creation of a new world in which everyone is provided for without destroying the planet, requires much more change than that.

But that’s not the only way to look at this question. All these companies, every single one of them, has consistently made objectively evil choices to make a little more profit. From oil spills and pipe lines through sacred lands to kill squads to polluted drinking water, each of these companies ruin lives for profit. They could provide us with energy in far far more ethical ways, but they consistently ruthlessly choose the most profitable option.

This doesn’t happen because the 100 people running them are evil, but because the capitalist system is designed in such a way that the profit motive always wins.

Capitalism is what is driving us to the edge of extinction. Capitalism pushes politicians and corporate rulers into power who are willing to ruthlessly follow the profit motive.

Now, let’s ask (without recommending any course of action, considering every practical barrier or starting a whole debate) the question: if people can’t bring the whole capitalist system down in one go, what would happen if you struck a blow at the rule of the profit motive and added the survival motive?

Right now, the only consequence these companies face for pursuing the profit motive at all cost is, well, profit. What if the people who make the decision to pollute, evict and pillage for profit suddenly found that that was an extremely dangerous job to be in? Would that have an impact on how these companies behaved in the world?