Eating meat is bad, but this won’t be solved by individual action. Putting a cost on every ton of beef, plastic, and carbon created would create market conditions that would reduce the production of these things and hence the consumption
There’s nothing wrong with individuals trying to be more conscientious about their eco footprint but unfortunately that has been turned by corporations who pollute vastly more into some kind of “only you can prevent climate change” messaging. We shouldn’t discourage anyone from doing better, but we also really need to turn up the pressure on the corporations.
Enough people need to reduce meat consumption and realize there are alternatives (and make it interesting to innovate alternatives for meat – just look at the explosion of alternatives over the last five years). They also contribute to creating awareness around this subject, influencing others to change or at least consider changing their behaviour.
Because in the end you need enough support to enact changes such as a meat tax. This has been tried in the Netherlands, but there still isn’t sufficient support to introduce this.
Can you explain what the collective in “collective action” is made up of, if not individuals? How does your solution not require individual action? “My individual vote won’t change anything” is the exact argument you’re making.
But let’s pretend a world filled with meat eaters would vote for the anti-meat party. Suddenly, meat costs 3 times as much (at the very least). Do you genuinely believe people would simply accept this change? There wouldn’t be protests the very next day? People wouldn’t vote for the yes-meat party immediately?
Any political action needs to be supported by the populace. Otherwise known as individual action.
True. However as long as a large potion of the population goes totally berserk if any politician even thinks about doing anything sensible that would however have an impact on the price of that next burger, it will be very hard to do something on a non individual level.
Eating meat is bad, but this won’t be solved by individual action. Putting a cost on every ton of beef, plastic, and carbon created would create market conditions that would reduce the production of these things and hence the consumption
There’s nothing wrong with individuals trying to be more conscientious about their eco footprint but unfortunately that has been turned by corporations who pollute vastly more into some kind of “only you can prevent climate change” messaging. We shouldn’t discourage anyone from doing better, but we also really need to turn up the pressure on the corporations.
What does holding corporations accountable look like if not refusing to give them our money while we advocate for regulation and bigger change?
But if you know it’s a problem then you can change right now instead of waiting for regulation to force it on you.
We can make change for the better in our own lifestyle while advocating for change.
It’s both.
Enough people need to reduce meat consumption and realize there are alternatives (and make it interesting to innovate alternatives for meat – just look at the explosion of alternatives over the last five years). They also contribute to creating awareness around this subject, influencing others to change or at least consider changing their behaviour.
Because in the end you need enough support to enact changes such as a meat tax. This has been tried in the Netherlands, but there still isn’t sufficient support to introduce this.
Everyone can stop support what is bad.
Can you explain what the collective in “collective action” is made up of, if not individuals? How does your solution not require individual action? “My individual vote won’t change anything” is the exact argument you’re making.
But let’s pretend a world filled with meat eaters would vote for the anti-meat party. Suddenly, meat costs 3 times as much (at the very least). Do you genuinely believe people would simply accept this change? There wouldn’t be protests the very next day? People wouldn’t vote for the yes-meat party immediately?
Any political action needs to be supported by the populace. Otherwise known as individual action.
True. However as long as a large potion of the population goes totally berserk if any politician even thinks about doing anything sensible that would however have an impact on the price of that next burger, it will be very hard to do something on a non individual level.