Skip Navigation
Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world
hash @lemmy.world

Honestly - How much will you sacrifice for a better world?

Confronted with the likelihood that we cannot achieve climate goals, confront socioeconomic inequality, and ultimately build a better world without significant personal sacrifice: How much are you personally capable and willing to lose? I mean this in the most earnest way possible. Acknowledging the likely possibility of working for an unethical organization while simultaneously supporting family who rely on you financially. Do you believe the amount we can and will bear aligns with the amount we must bear?

59 comments

  • Nothing, I'm only making a better world if I can make my own life better at the same time. I do live an extreme frugal existence and avoid working for any unethical organization, but it's not a sacrifice.

    What we can "bear" is the wrong question for a couple reasons:

    • Consumer luxuries don't actually make for a better life.
    • Altruistic scheming isn't anyone's actual motivation for doing things.
    • "sacrifice" is irrational bargaining; reality doesn't care whether you've made yourself enough of a martyr, and people who want to be martyrs don't care if what they're sacrificing actually makes much of a difference.

    An effective solution will involve changes we can be happy about and a lifestyle that is actually better than what we have now. Commutes and lives spent stressing over money are a shit trade for what people get from it anyway, it won't be hard to do better with less.

    • Consumer luxuries don't actually make for a better life.

      The fundamental luxuries do.

      Humans spend a third of their life asleep. A good mattress makes a big difference in the quality of sleep, but it being a Cali King sure isn’t going to change much.

      Modern life requires a high degree of physical mobility. Public transportation (Europe, etc) and cars allow us to cover distances in hours that would have taken days even a century and a half ago. A decent-quality vehicle can make a big difference in the reliability of said transportation and our ability to get around, but it being a Mercedes or a Bentley sure isn’t going to change much.

      And the list could easily run to hundreds of examples, if not thousands.

      We live in a world where most any first-world consumer item is a luxury compared to the global poor, or pretty much anything comparable from a century and a half ago.

      What doesn’t have much of a positive impact, however, is the delta between an affordable item and a high-end item that costs many multiples more. People can and should aim for those “luxuries” that don’t yet tip over into deminishing returns, as opposed to those luxuries that are excessive purely for the purpose of producing excessive displays of wealth.

      Like vehicles - both of mine (sedan, utility pickup) are approaching a quarter century of age. Could I afford brand-new vehicles? Sure. But why would I waste my money and planetary resources like that? The ones I have still work just fine with only basic maintenance, and are perfectly adequate in getting me (and cargo) from point A to point B. I have absolutely no ego that demands newer or fancier.

      • Modern life requires a high degree of physical mobility

        It doesn't have to be that way, and I'm not convinced it's strictly better that way.

        We live in a world where most any first-world consumer item is a luxury compared to the global poor

        Idk about that, even people without electricity or running water can get a cheap cell phone and solar charger now.

        What doesn’t have much of a positive impact, however, is the delta between an affordable item and a high-end item that costs many multiples more. People can and should aim for those “luxuries” that don’t yet tip over into deminishing returns

        Definitely. No need to be giving up things like regular bathing and functional cooking utensils that make a big difference for little expense.

  • I think there’s a fundamental problem with the question that goes to the heart of the climate crisis and which makes a significant contribution to why I think we will not solve it.

    There’s two versions of this question. The first is the one you asked - how much are individuals and families willing to give up in order to make the climate problem go away (whatever that means at this point). The second is “If you knew with 100% accuracy that by you going vegan (or ditching your car or installing solar or composting…), that the climate crisis would definitely be solved, would you do it?

    Let’s pretend that I don’t want to go vegan. I eat Big Macs every night. Porterhouse steaks every weekend. I drive an F-350 to the ice cream store down the block. All of that. Let’s say I love those things. If I personally give them up, it will make no difference if we don’t reorganize the entire global economy. You might convince me to vote for politicians who would pass laws to make that happen, but you’d have a harder time selling me on sacrificing something I see as a core benefit for zero gain. It’s the difference between “How much would you give to get a homeless person off the streets and a new start” and “How much would you give a homeless person if you knew they were just going to set the cash on fire” if you see where I’m going with that.

    We are humans. We are cooperators. That’s how we got where we are. Unfortunately there’s also other dynamics in play as well. I honestly have no idea how far back we’d need to rewind the tape in order to have a chance at a better outcome. I do think any progress we can make is good. This just feels like a boulder rolling towards your house kind of thing where all you can do is watch.

  • pretty much nothing. as an apprentice living off of not even minimum wage, i cannot afford any more price increases.

    i am also a car enthusiast, and i want to keep the cobustion engine around (hydrogen ICE comes to mind). i would also like to keep the unlimited speed on the Autobahn, even if it would slightly improve efficiency in terms of fuel consumption and traffic accidents to implement a speed limit.

    i strongly oppose the enshittification of every online service and think these datacenters used purely for processing collected data should not exist. they are being operated with coal energy in germany, which is just stupid. (from a quick google, they're using 18 Billion Watts)

    Essential online services and infrastructure should be FOSS-based honestly. i NEED a google account to use public transport.

    also fuck public transport. i have a 49€ ticket and cannot rely on it. we once had a 2-Month period where everyone had to use public transport because the schoool is located in the middle of the city. no one was ever on time these entire 2 months. did i mention that driving to work is 3 times faster, and i get to sit in a very comfortable heated seat the entire time?

  • THE QUESTION in so many ways IMO. But also, for me at least, it misses the point.

    For me, so much is about the social. Like, I would have a hard time sacrificing a lot to save humanity from the climate crisis if I knew humanity wouldn't know that they were saved (they don't have to know it was me) but just figured the climate problem simply disappeared without learning to manage their problems.

    Otherwise, personally, the basic sacrifice that is a no-brainer is to lead a simple, unassuming and arguably (from a materialistic standpoint) boring life. Regarding the climate crisis I'd say I've done that most of my life, which I don't say with pride honestly as it's about the only thing I've done.

    Beyond that, if there's some social buy-in from many to the relevant values etc, I think I'd certainly be willing to risk or end my life for the greater good.

59 comments