Create a bigger carbon footprint and likely use more natural resources than all the people who read this will use in their entire lives. The fossil fuels and carbon created by the film industry is colossal.
Yet we have to put up with sanctimonious climate change rhetoric from practically everyone in Hollywood.
LOL!
At least he doesn't travel by private jet like DiCaprio, but you're right. Some of these movie stars are so clueless with their do-gooding rhetoric, whilst ignoring that they possess much bigger carbon footprints than practically anyone else.
I wouldn't think to lecture the average Ethiopian or Indigenous South American about their carbon footprint, but I'm pretty damned certain I have a much lower carbon footprint than Ruffalo, or anyone else in Hollywood for that matter.
I will say a single person who has the capital to enjoy what life has to offer should do so responsibly. However, I also believe these people have a platform to motivate others to use less natural resources and that's a good thing. I seriously doubt they are clueless as to their own consumption as compared to your average MC poster. I really think some people are simply bitter that others have it better than they, and that others want to see a better world while they really don't care a hoot about such things.
shareI really think some people are simply bitter that others have it better than theyEnvy is the driving force for social change.
[–] MalkovichMalkovi (268) 3 minutes agoYou wrote that without being sarcastic, without it being a parody or even an unfinished Haiku? You're trolling with that comment aren't you?
***
I really think some people are simply bitter that others have it better than they
***
Envy is the driving force for social change.
Black people seeing white people who unfairly possess more than them = civil rights
Thanks for jumping in ! Most of my arguments are rather ad hoc from my own observation. I always admire when people can cite actual facts and legislation to point out the fallacies of some arguments.
shareWhat 'fallacies' has NorrinRad pointed out?
He has merely regurgitated the facts concerning the passage of the Civil Rights Act 1964. He hasn't engaged on any level with my argument regarding the underlying reasons for progress.
Envy is the enemy of complacency and contentment. If the underclass, whether socioeconomic, racial or sexual, 'accepted' their 'place' in society, rather than striving for something better, we'd forever end up with a society in which all power and wealth was concentrated in the hands in rich white men.
You may not like the word 'envy', but tell me why it is such a bad thing, really? Because some Medieval Catholic monks told us so?
Talk to him, don't talk to me. I don't understand what you're getting at. I just said stars can enjoy a certain lifestyle while also politicking for a better environment. You bring up envy and I don't know what else. You can engage in some socio/anthropological flight of fancy, but don't expect me to go along with it. Try to impress someone else.
shareI'm not interested in impressing anyone. In fact, I, sadly, doubt my comments will win any friends or admirers, since the idea that envy is in fact a good thing, is clearly considered deeply offensive or erroneous.
But if elites truly want to create a better world, they need to sacrifice some of their privileges and advantages. They cannot expect those who have even less than them to give up what little they have (by comparison), whilst they continue to live the high life. Instead they need to truly endorse a complete social revolution that challenges the patriarchal capitalist system that they (particularly white men, like Ruffalo) have benefited from. I don't expect them to live in poverty and hardship, but I do expect them to extend and share out some of the privileges and advantages they take for granted.
By displaying such goodwill, they are more likely to inspire others to live a more ethical life. As it stands, why should the relatively poor listen to wealthy, high-living and out-of-touch movie stars? Like I say, I live a more ethical life than most of them, on a hundredth of their wealth, and moreover my lifestyle is much more attainable for the average joe than that of a multi-millionaire celebrity. Maybe I should have more of a voice on these issues...
So use your voice to the extent you can. Don't be obnoxious, but Vote, Volunteer, be a good influence on your community. You may not see immediate results, but this will assuage your conscience, and push the Needle toward the good.
shareThe problem is you see 'envy' as an inherently bad thing. As a 'sin'.
I don't. I see it as a positive.
I see it as a motivator for the oppressed and impoverished to strive for the same rights, the same opportunities, the same treatment, as those who possess more than them.
The term 'the politics of envy' is used by the media, and right-wing politicians, to put down the impressed and impoverished and keep them in their place, by making them feel as if wanting the same rights, opportunities and treatment as the ruling classes is somehow evil.
I say, reclaim the word. Yes, we're envious. So what? What's wrong with that?
As for your dry 'explanation' of the civil rights movement, all you do is give a breakdown of how the Civil Rights Act 1964 came to be passed, as if civil rights begin and end with the, admittedly significant, Act. Nor do you consider the actual reasons and motives behind the legislation.
The problem is you see 'envy' as an inherently bad thing. As a 'sin'.Once before you were a bit taken aback when I mentioned it is perfectly okay to use Black-Balled, Black-Mailed, Black-Hat, etc, etc.
I don't. I see it as a positive.
I'm not going to make a direct parallel between 'envy' and the various words reclaimed by black, female and LGBTQ communities in order to rob them of their racist, sexist and homophobic sting and power. Admittedly, there are many working-class people who disagree with me, despise socialism, and are extremely deferential to the upper-classes, believing them to be inherently superior and 'born to rule' (then again, there are plenty of black people, women, and gay people who might be categorised by some as 'traitors' to their group).
As far as I'm aware, 'envy' is seen by most people, poor, rich, socialist, capitalist, and so on, as an inherently bad thing. However, as someone who has personally missed out on various opportunities for reasons that were beyond my control, I would like to reclaim the term, and challenge the conservative 'politics of envy' tag head-on, by saying "what's actually wrong with a bit of 'envy?'"
After all, if rich, albeit fictional, plutocrats like Gordon Gekko can be held up as yuppie idols for saying "greed is good", why shouldn't the 99% be able to reframe the narrative concerning another of the 'seven deadly sins'?
The term 'the politics of envy' is used by the media, and right-wing politicians, to put down the impressed and impoverished and keep them in their place, by making them feel as if wanting the same rights, opportunities and treatment as the ruling classes is somehow evil.In this case of your battle against the Right-Wing media and Right-Wing Politicians you've allowed them to negotiate the terms of your own surrender to their POV by accepting the politics of "Dis-Truthy-ness".
I say, reclaim the word. Yes, we're envious. So what? What's wrong with that?
I don't disagree with much of what you say, but I still come back to the same argument: what is so wrong with 'envy'?
I believe in equality and a fairer world where the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest is much smaller, and we value every single individual instead of lavishing absurd praise on some, and demonising and degrading others. But at present, we're a long way from that, and if we complacently accept the status-quo or the false myth of the 'meritocracy' we'll never get there.
It's up to the have-nots, whether they're have-nots because of the colour of their skin, their gender, or the circumstances they were born into, to say "this ain't right. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, deserves their day in the sun!"
I don't disagree with much of what you say, but I still come back to the same argument: what is so wrong with 'envy'?As I said there is absolutely nothing wrong with the word Envy. You're on a quest to redefine the position/motivations/intent of those who have or had gone through the Civil Rights movement (or are in or going through the quest for Civil Rights) as being Envious because the Right-Wing Media and RW-Politicians has framed that as the "Politics of Envy".
400 Years Ago this Month
After having been kidnapped from their villages in what is present-day Angola, forced onto a Portuguese slave ship bound for what Europeans called the New World and stolen from that ship by English pirates in a confrontation off the coast of Mexico, “some 20. and odd Negroes” landed at Point Comfort in 1619, in the English settlement that would become Virginia.February is Black or African-American History Month.
Their arrival was duly noted by the colony’s secretary, John Rolfe, famous as the widower of the Native American woman called Pocahontas.
The harrowing journey that began with about 350 Africans on board the San Juan Bautista was one of terror, hunger and death even before the encounter with the pirates. About half of the Africans who boarded the Portuguese ship died, some of the millions who perished during the Middle Passage from the 1600s to the 1800s. When the San Juan Bautista docked near what is now Veracruz, Mexico, on Aug. 30, 1619, there were 147 Africans on board. Fifty had been taken by those English pirates aboard two ships, the White Lion and the Treasurer.
When the White Lion arrived unheralded in Point Comfort, the captain’s immediate task was to sell the Africans in exchange for food.
“Few ships, before or since, have unloaded a more momentous cargo,” historian and journalist Lerone Bennett wrote in his 1962 book, "Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America." (The subtitle was changed in later editions to "The History of Black America.")
For many black readers, accustomed to being told in myriad ways that blacks had no history, the notion that their ancestors’ presence in America predated the 1620 arrival of the Pilgrims story was a mind-boggling revelation. Bennett provided an origin story to embrace.
White History Month happens the other eleven months of the year.
Envy is defined by Merriam Webster as the 'painful or resentful awareness of an advantage enjoyed by another joined with a desire to possess the same advantage'.
Black or African-American History Month doesn't represent an exceptional advantage. It is intended to redress systemic racial inequality that favours white people.
When I talk about 'envy' I'm talking about the awareness of, and desire to possess, a genuine advantage enjoyed by others, in this case systemically advantaged groups, including the wealthy.
Unfortunately, the unwillingness of Americans to grasp this concept explains why social democracy is so abhorred by the USA.
White History Month happens the other eleven months of the year.
****
No one on here knows that but you and I? I know you are not a fan of Donald Trump so, here's how you should have began that statement.
"Most people don't know that...…"
***
Envy is defined by Merriam Webster as the 'painful or resentful awareness of an advantage enjoyed by another joined with a desire to possess the same advantage'.
***
That's nice. So those that lack or are denied their full Civil Rights are pained and resentful. As a Noun: Envy is a feeling of discontented or resentful longing aroused by someone else's possessions, qualities, or luck.
As a Verb: Envy is desire to have a quality, possession, or other desirable attribute belonging to (someone else).
You're free to Co-Opt Envy all you want. I don't envy what should belong to me because someone else has it, took it or is denying me of what is rightfully mine. Thus a right.
Black or African-American History Month doesn't represent an exceptional advantage. It is intended to redress systemic racial inequality that favours white people.
***
No one in the USA presents Black History Month as an exceptional advantage. Why? because Black History month IS American history. You know it's the history that some decided to omit in history books.
When I talk about 'envy' I'm talking about the awareness of, and desire to possess, a genuine advantage enjoyed by others, in this case systemically advantaged groups, including the wealthy.
***
Oddly enough that sounds more like White Privilege or just Power Privilege. Civil Rights is more of a Need than a Want. Envy is resigned to the wants of others whether you need it or not.
Unfortunately, the unwillingness of Americans to grasp this concept explains why social democracy is so abhorred by the USA.
***
Social Democracy is not abhorred by the USA. Remember what I typed earlier?
Deconstruction, Dismembered, demonized,.....
Those that have are very good at dishonest intellectual debate. Socialism = Bad, when it is neither. Like Envy, and I am not saying you're doing anything wrong, the word loses all meaning.
That's nice. So those that lack or are denied their full Civil Rights are pained and resentful. As a Noun: Envy is a feeling of discontented or resentful longing aroused by someone else's possessions, qualities, or luck.Why wouldn't they be pained and resentful? I know I would. You make it seem as if it's wrong to be pained and resentful over a state of systemic unfairness.
You're free to Co-Opt Envy all you want. I don't envy what should belong to me because someone else has it, took it or is denying me of what is rightfully mine. Thus a right.
The carbon footprint of making a Marvel movie is probably less than one percent of the carbon footprint made by everyone who drives to the theater to see it.
shareThat's a good point too.
shareYou really think that? Let's do a rough estimate. Say these movies make about a billion dollars each, and tickets are roughly $10. That means 100 million people see them, and probably drive an average of about 10 miles to a theater, more in the country less in the city. If they get 20 miles to the gallon and gas costs $2.50 a gallon, that would be a billion miles, 50 million gallons of gas, and $125 million dollars. I think this is being generous, particularly because a family with kids and friends would be in a single car not 5 separate cars. The real number might be closer to $50 million.
Avengers Infinity Wars had a budget of $400 million which I assume is standard. You predicted it would be 1% or less. It's closer to 800%.
You can see why people especially in Hollywood are so wrong about the environment. "Carbon footprint" is just pseudoscientific jargon for economic activity.
Why are you rambling on about budget? If you really wanted to compare then you would estimate the number of vehicles traveling to the theater and compare them to the number of people in the credits.
Lets say the movie made a billion dollars. Assuming an average price of $12 and a squad of 3 per vehicle then that's still a whopping 28 million vehicles traveling to the theater.
Now compare 28 million to the number of people in the credits. One percent of 28 million is 280,000. I'm telling you right now there wasn't anywhere close to 280,000 people working on any of the Marvel movies including Infinity War which made over $2 billion.
And you complain about Hollywood being wrong? Good lord.
Yes you are right. A thousand people making the movie is fewer than 100 million people watching the movie. They all exhale carbon dioxide equally. How silly of me.
share[deleted]