environmentalism and personal responsibility has been a topic that i have wanted to write about for a while and one that i have grappled with for even longer. as much as i would love for this to be a more formal argument that weighs the pros and cons of the situation, it inevitably will boil down to my opinion and personal reflections on the matter.
pushing climate change onto the (typically) small actions of individuals is, in my opinion, a misplaced focus. corporations are often the largest contributors to environmental degradation, yet the narrative surrounding environmentalism often centers on personal responsibility. when i was in elementary school, i remember frequently encountering campaigns, both in and out of school, which urged us to turn off the tap while brushing our teeth or washing our hands to conserve water. this sentiment has turning into banning plastic straws and urging people to recycle and use paper or reusable bags. of course there are individual actions which make more impact than other, but regardless, these types of actions are the ones that dominate discussions about how to save the planet. while these actions are not without value, this emphasis diverts attentions from the systemic changes necessary to address the true scale of the crisis at hand.
consider this: the top 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions (though this number slightly changes between studies). yet, we are told that our individual choices hold the key to reversing climate change. this narrative shifts the burden of responsibility onto individuals, making the problem feel insurmountable and, frankly, disheartening. it leaves me grappling with a sense of apathy about our capability for meaningful change. it's not that individual actions don't matter; they do, but they should complement, not replace, the push for larger systemic changes.
another common form of advocacy that is often suggested is contacting your representatives. i've noticed that this has become an increasingly common suggestion in discussions about climate advocacy, but also advocacy in general. i can't count the number of times during this past election cycle that i have been told to call my representative and follow a script to show my opposition to the most recent government bill being pushed. this is touted as a vital step in driving legislative change, but i've struggles to understand its effectiveness. even when constituents make their voices heard, meaningful progress often stalls on the institutional and governmental scale. i won't claim that i know all of the reasons why this happens but i can imagine that it stems from corporate lobbying, a lack of political will, or even a fundamental disinterest from the representatives themselves.
so where does that leave us? if the traditional, "governmentally acceptable" methods of advocating for change fall short, what alternatives exist? these reflections tie me back to the concept that systemic issues require collective solutions. grassroots movements and direct action have historically driven meaningful progress in environmental advocacy in the past. these efforts remain critically important, but it feels like something has shifted in the past few years. there's a pervasive sense of apathy or desensitization among people, as though the sheer scale of the climate crisis has left many feeling powerless to effect meaningful change. this collective disillusionment complicates the potential for grassroots movements to gain the momentum they need to drive large-scale action.
a facet of the path forward demands a rethinking of where responsibility lies. it's time to hold corporations and governments accountable. while individual actions have their place and opting to walk over driving is a great personal step, they cannot and should not bear the weight of this global challenge.