Conservation by Conservatism

[VinnyVeritas]

I was hanging my clothes on the line, because, I’m as green-conscious as the next guy. Now, am I doing this because I want to save the planet? Not really, it’s because I want to save money, but one of the side effects of this conservative proclivity is that I am consuming less energy and reducing my carbon footprint; no coercion involved, just common sense. One could even say, it’s common-sense conservatism. My money, my energy, my voluntarily reduced consumption. I’m not asking or demanding anyone else to sacrifice.

I am driven by self-interest.
My version of self-conservation makes a tangible difference.

If I were a Leftist, my energy would be directed, with zero carbon reduction (in fact, with all the printing, traveling, protesting, preaching the Gospel pf Gaia and lobbying politicians with cash, an increased carbon footprint, you know, like Greta Thurnberg and Al Gore), in order to be noticed and admired for your principled stance. A Leftist wants to save the planet, I’ll grant you that, no matter what the cost, but the cost must be borne by everybody by force, preferably the figurative gun to your head of involuntary government taxation (especially if they can purchase an indulgence from taxation due to some artificial circumstance, e.g., I’m just a humble student concerned for my future, I selflessly work for others not money, I am of the caring , concerned class, i.e., a self-identified “minority” that is oppressed by the taxation of the rich and powerful who never pay their fair share...,).

They are driven by virtue-signal.
Their vision of conservation just annoys the f*** out of everyone else.

 

[SilentSometimes]

The thing is, the right and left actually agree on much more than anyone in this forum wants to give them credit for. Instead of focusing on the things that they have in common, like saving energy which has positive effects for the planet and people’s finances, it seems like there is a greater need to point fingers at the other side and say, “you’re bad and my side is better!” But why? There are extremist for everything in this world but they’re not the majority.

People can be Christian and respect LGBTQIA+ people.

They can be pro-gun ownership but also support regulations.

They can personally not believe in abortion but not prevent others from getting them.

Taxing millionaires in the US would solve a lot of problems but the media has divided the people because as long as there is internal bickering amongst the 99%, then the 1% is safe.

Find some common ground. Tax the rich. Separate church and state. Support better people to run for office so you have better choices when elections come around. Make campaign money transparent. Punish politicians who make laws that benefit corporations and screw over people. And stop basing your decisions on whether someone is a republican or a democrat. Base it on their policies and then hold them accountable.

Thank you for coming to my TedTalk. I’ll be here all week. Try the onion rings.

 

[ll74]

Nobody has ever demanded I reduce my carbon footprint. I have bought technology that reduces it because it has become affordable enough for me to do so and it frees up money for other things.

 

[zipman]

Lol, I don't think A_J knows what tangible means.

 

[Rotadom]

If I were a Leftist

You would be a lot less whiny.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

AJ washes out the skidmarks in his dirty draws, puts 'em on a clothesline for the sun and wind to dry, then suddenly has a "genuine" green energy moment to pontificate against the "Left."

Tune in tomorrow for Part Deux when he discovers how walking cuts down on burning fossil fuels.

 

[Rotadom]

AJ washes out the skidmarks in his dirty draws, puts 'em on a clothesline for the sun and wind to dry, then suddenly has a "genuine" green energy moment to pontificate against the "Left."

Tune in tomorrow for Part Deux when he discovers how walking cuts down on burning fossil fuels.

The only reason that he didn't figure this out many decades ago is because conservation is a Leftist construct.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Hate to tell y'all, but conservation is a big deal to the gun-totin' critter killin' crowd, because if you fuck up the critter environment, there won't be no more critters to shoot-n-kill.


One of the most reactionary men I ever knew was also the most hard-core recycler I ever met.


Part of it is Depression-era thinking, and the current crop of "humans" could stand to learn a thing or three about some of those principles.

 

[zipman]

Hate to tell y'all, but conservation is a big deal to the gun-totin' critter killin' crowd, because if you fuck up the critter environment, there won't be no more critters to shoot-n-kill.


One of the most reactionary men I ever knew was also the most hard-core recycler I ever met.


Part of it is Depression-era thinking, and the current crop of "humans" could stand to learn a thing or three about some of those principles.

Yes, we saw that when democrats urged gas conservation and right wingers ran out and bought Hummers to drive.

Our how tight wingers fight every clean air or clean water regulation.

So spare me your anecdotal nonsense.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Yes, we saw that when democrats urged gas conservation and right wingers ran out and bought Hummers to drive.

Our how tight wingers fight every clean air or clean water regulation.

So spare me your anecdotal nonsense.

President Richard Nixon proposed the establishment of EPA on July 9, 1970; it began operation on December 2, 1970, after Nixon signed an executive order. Wikipedia

History is almost as much fun as words . . . .

 

[ll74]

History is almost as much fun as words . . . .

What are Republican's views on the EPA today?

 

[zipman]

History is almost as much fun as words

History is almost as much fun as words . . . .

Yes, your one example from over half a century ago certainly refutes my point.

Well done.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Yes, your one example from over half a century ago certainly refutes my point.

Well done.

Moreso than your anecdotal nonsense refuted mine.

 

[RobDownSouth]

History is almost as much fun as words . . . .

Anecdata! Seriously, Nixon's EPA was the high-water mark for conservative care about the environment.

Since Saint Reagan, the RWCJ has dedicated their party to dismantling the EPA, adopting the mantra "drill babby drill".

 

[TrailerHitch]

I don't need a government agency or societal pressure to do what's right for the environment. I do what I can because it's the right thing to do. My parents, Dad especially was way out front on the recycle, refurbish, reuse way of life. I have carried that lifestyle on. My wife and I recycle like fiends, we plant several trees a year, we usually have a big garden, I make an environmentally safer weed killer and don't touch things like Round Up. When we use the A/C the temp is usually set at 74 and heat is set at 68. We also turned over an acre of yard back into wild grasses and flowers for the bees, butterflies, and all the little creatures we have here. We have black snakes that we just leave alone as they are natures rodent control. We have deer, armadillos, possums, skinks, Tennessee fence lizards, and frogs and toads everywhere. Add to that a wide variety of birds to include our annual Humming Bird visitors.

It just makes sense to be a good steward of our planet.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I do what I can because it's the right thing to do.

It just makes sense to be a good steward of our planet.

Somewhere in Hell, Ayn Rand moans in eternal torment, suddenly exacerbated by the unexpected loss of one of her most fervent devotees....

 

[TrailerHitch]

Somewhere in Hell, Ayn Rand moans in eternal torment, suddenly exacerbated by the unexpected loss of one of her most fervent devotees....

I guess I didn't realize being ecologically sound had to follow a specific political agenda.

 

[Comshaw]

I was hanging my clothes on the line, because, I’m as green-conscious as the next guy. Now, am I doing this because I want to save the planet? Not really, it’s because I want to save money, but one of the side effects of this conservative proclivity is that I am consuming less energy and reducing my carbon footprint; no coercion involved, just common sense. One could even say, it’s common-sense conservatism. My money, my energy, my voluntarily reduced consumption. I’m not asking or demanding anyone else to sacrifice.

I am driven by self-interest.
My version of self-conservation makes a tangible difference.

If I were a Leftist, my energy would be directed, with zero carbon reduction (in fact, with all the printing, traveling, protesting, preaching the Gospel pf Gaia and lobbying politicians with cash, an increased carbon footprint, you know, like Greta Thurnberg and Al Gore), in order to be noticed and admired for your principled stance. A Leftist wants to save the planet, I’ll grant you that, no matter what the cost, but the cost must be borne by everybody by force, preferably the figurative gun to your head of involuntary government taxation (especially if they can purchase an indulgence from taxation due to some artificial circumstance, e.g., I’m just a humble student concerned for my future, I selflessly work for others not money, I am of the caring , concerned class, i.e., a self-identified “minority” that is oppressed by the taxation of the rich and powerful who never pay their fair share...,).

They are driven by virtue-signal.
Their vision of conservation just annoys the f*** out of everyone else.

The problem is this:

I am driven by self-interest.

So if burning the house down would benefit you, you'd do it, right? No thought of future generations. No thought of anyone else but yourself. AJ that's EXACTLY why the country is in such a screwed-up state. We have half the fucking congress thinking the same way, "If it doesn't do something for me, put money in my pocket, get me reelected, get me freebees, fuck it! Burn it down!"

And the leftists might be driven by virtue-signaling, but they are (even if it's a side effect) thinking and planning and doing for someone else besides themselves. I can't say the same for those who are "driven by self-interest". There was a time when Republicans were that way. That hasn't been true in a lot of years. No? Observe:



Comshaw

 

[RobDownSouth]

I guess I didn't realize being ecologically sound had to follow a specific political agenda.

Pshaw, AJ, if we've learned one thing from your glibertarian agenda over the years, it's that it is not enough for you to "win", but others must endure punishing hardship as a result of your victory, Zero Sum game and all that stuff.

 

[Lazaran]

•
As with many things, the OP has a myopic view of society as demonstrated by their failure to recognize the limited options for most people living in urban settings (which is most people) to reduce their carbon footprint.

Does the OP really believe it’s practicable for every apartment / condo / row house dweller to hang their laundry out to dry???

A single incel living out in the sticks??? Sure.

For most others??? Not so much.

Hope that ^ helps.



OP

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

•
As with many things, the OP has a myopic view of society as demonstrated by their failure to recognize the limited options for most people living in urban settings( which is most people) to reduce their carbon footprint.

Does the OP really believe it’s practicable for every apartment / condo / row house dweller to hang their laundry out to dry???

A single incel living out in the sticks??? Sure.

For most others??? Not so much.

Hope that ^ helps.



OP

People living in dense urban settings already have a smaller carbon footprint than people living out in the middle of nowhere.

The biggest thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint is stop driving. If you live somewhere where you need to drive daily, hanging your laundry out to dry is pointless.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Pshaw, AJ, if we've learned one thing from your glibertarian agenda over the years, it's that it is not enough for you to "win", but others must endure punishing hardship as a result of your victory, Zero Sum game and all that stuff.

Dude, one last time, I have no ALT. So no matter how many times you play the big lie, it is still a big lie. But I guess when that's all you have you have to go with it.

I don't believe that hardship is a necessary element of good stewardship of our planet.

 

[Lazaran]

People living in dense urban settings already have a smaller carbon footprint than people living out in the middle of nowhere.

The biggest thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint is stop driving. If you live somewhere where you need to drive everywhere, hanging your laundry out to dry doesn’t matter.

•
I was trying to focus on the OP’s “heroic” personal action of hanging their laundry out to dry so they MIGHT be able to relate to the greater point I was making.

There are definitely maaaany ways people living in close proximity / in urban centers reduces their overall carbon footprint as opposed to if they were widely dispersed.

There is no “green rural solution” short of the genocidal depopulating of urban centers and the de-evolution of our modern technological society along with its manufacturing and distribution hubs.

And that ^ is actually what some on the right (the OP) are not so subtly suggesting / advocating imho.

JFC

SAD!!!

 

[AlexBailey]

I was hanging my clothes on the line, because, I’m as green-conscious as the next guy. Now, am I doing this because I want to save the planet? Not really, it’s because I want to save money, but one of the side effects of this conservative proclivity is that I am consuming less energy and reducing my carbon footprint; no coercion involved, just common sense. One could even say, it’s common-sense conservatism. My money, my energy, my voluntarily reduced consumption. I’m not asking or demanding anyone else to sacrifice.

I am driven by self-interest.
My version of self-conservation makes a tangible difference.

If I were a Leftist, my energy would be directed, with zero carbon reduction (in fact, with all the printing, traveling, protesting, preaching the Gospel pf Gaia and lobbying politicians with cash, an increased carbon footprint, you know, like Greta Thurnberg and Al Gore), in order to be noticed and admired for your principled stance. A Leftist wants to save the planet, I’ll grant you that, no matter what the cost, but the cost must be borne by everybody by force, preferably the figurative gun to your head of involuntary government taxation (especially if they can purchase an indulgence from taxation due to some artificial circumstance, e.g., I’m just a humble student concerned for my future, I selflessly work for others not money, I am of the caring , concerned class, i.e., a self-identified “minority” that is oppressed by the taxation of the rich and powerful who never pay their fair share...,).

They are driven by virtue-signal.
Their vision of conservation just annoys the f*** out of everyone else.

Virtue signaling is a form of advertising and promoting what you believe in. Don’t feel so put upon - that’s on you.

Under your “vision” of how things should be, how would vehicle and industry emissions be today? Would businesses make the decisions to clean up all of their messes?

Using the legislative process to enact regulations that promote the general welfare is why internal combustion engines aren’t allowed to spew emissions that used to cast smog clouds over large areas and populations.

Do you believe car manufacturers would have developed better emissions vehicles if there weren’t regulatory standards that were earmarked by elected representatives and enforced by law?

 

[AlexBailey]

The biggest thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint is stop driving. If you live somewhere where you need to drive daily, hanging your laundry out to dry is pointless.

While I understand and feel your sentiment, I disagree that selective energy conservation is pointless. We are imperfect people in an imperfect world, every bit of something good you put into the world is good, even when you may fail elsewhere.