316
Populations of wild species fell by an average of 73% from 1970 to 2022, WWF says (www.reuters.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/world@lemmy.world
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Nearly 6,000 monitored vertebrate species across more than 35,000 populations declined by an average of 73% from 1970 to 2022, the World Wide Fund ​for Nature said in its latest Living Planet Report published on Thursday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Yeah, but it isn't enough to know something is wrong, you should consider why people aren't rioting (more), and whether it is too reductive to assume it is a select few individuals and not a system that empowers them (even if they have disproportionate power over that system).

Most people are working dude, and many of them have to work out of responsibility for dependents. Ending this system also doesn't just mean taking the billionaires' yachts away, it means ending cheap electronics or coffee for the Global North, it means that clothes and time become more materially expensive for the benefactors in the metropole, which includes you. You and the people around you are effected by climate change and ecological destruction, but your immediate material interests are more aligned with maintaining this system than it is ending it, and you guys behave as such whether you realize it or not.

People riot in colonized spaces all the time, but if they aren't stopped by the colonial puppet states who occupy them, they're stopped by the imperialist militaries that you pay into whether through taxes, your state's federal investment portfolios, or the wealth that is directly extracted from your labour into the hands of capitalists. There is a reason that people in the metropole only started giving a shit after it effected them, it's hard to risk your own security for something that you can only rationally understand is real, and if we're being honest, the way of life in the metropole makes many of these people too exhausted or petulant to put much effort into that.

It would be incredible if all we needed was some white guys in the metropole to kill a few naughty bois to end all of this, but there's a reason that this hasn't happened even if it would work. Liberals in the metropole have a hard time knowing what to do about any of this because they don't want to recognize how they materially benefit from this violence, or grapple with the commitment to risk their security once they do.

edit: well, there we go, lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Nah mass consciousness is on the rise. In my home province a few years ago the government tried to ban collective bargaining for custodian services to which the province responded with a planned general strike. It won, the government immediately backed down. We do have power. We just forget that until we dont.

    https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/the-threat-of-a-general-strike-shook-doug-fords-ontario-government/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I don't know what you would have read in my comment that suggested that we don't have "power," and I think that your response was to say "yes, but people here use their efforts to the benefit of some workers here," shows that you don't really understand the comment I left (or didn't read it and just want to say something righteous).

    That's fine that labour movements happen in the metropole, and I'll remind you that they used to be far more prominent than they currently are, but that they happen doesn't demonstrate solidarity even among workers throughout the metropole, let alone a willingness among those workers to sacrifice their material security to the benefit of colonized peoples in the global south. Again, so long as you don't recognize that this is what the objective has to be in order to challenge this system, a slight raise for vulnerable workers here will amount to a snooze button.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Try shutting down imperialism from within a core country and you'll see the resistance is much more than most living there are willing to risk.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago*

    Are able* to risk. As much as I hate settlers and privilege, there is a reality to the precarity they exist in. It is partially manufactured by the state to incentivize their compliance and punish dissidence, but this is still a brutally genocidal culture where failure to uphold employment and keep up with the constantly increasing cost of living is met with violence either through the police or shelter/food insecurity.

    Most people here genuinely cannot risk fighting the state without subjecting dependents to violence. There is a will element certainly, in that you can always (unfairly) claim that we are all obligated to pay that price, but I can't imagine you could actually let your elderly loved ones or children experience poverty for the chance to be part of a movement that would require the rest of the people here to also subject their dependents to that violence.

    They're using the vulnerable as a shield, as they always do, and they understand that to resist would be to commit violence against our most vulnerable members of society. These people (Canadians), want me dead for something as petty as culture war excitement or their meager excess property rights, there's no way I could realistically put my child at risk out of trust for them to do the same.

    This isn't to say resistance is impossible or pointless, but to point out that there is a reason the people who resist are often younger without dependents, and why this system has made it increasingly difficult to live alone without relying on others.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent