Yes, as much as it's good that a domestic abuser still pays the rent and puts the food on the table.

On the other hand, it is a failure of the government that people don't have any other choice but to consume what is available.

Don't blame powerless victims, blame the powerful who are responsible, but do nothing about the problem.

If 5% of the people on the road are victims and 95% of the people drive huge cars just because they feel like it, can't they be blamed?

The victims? Of course they can't be blamed.

The people who drive huge cars can be blamed, but it's pointless because you'll never get people to voluntarily stop driving huge cars if they want to drive huge cars. You can, and should, blame the government for allowing manufacturers to sell huge cars and people to drive them, if the problem is so huge.

If there's a point to your comment, I did not get it.

The point is that people who buy huge cars can't claim that it's Ford's fault for polluting when it's their personal choice to get a wasteful vehicle. Same with people who fly a lot for fun or any number of environmentally damaging things.

Yeah, but each individual, by themselves, cannot make any significant positive change by giving up huge cars, while doing so means giving up something they want. So the gain/loss tradeoff is not good on an individual level.

You can assign collective blame, but what good is that, except for virtue signalling and guilt tripping? It's not an effective method of social change.

There is an organization (government) that can make those changes that you want (ban huge cars) - so why not blame them for not doing it?