Deciding what bank you will get your home loan from -> not something you do every day, it's ok to do some research
Deciding what cafe you will get your next lungo from -> not worth your time
This doesn't mean that the shooter doesn't have his own agency and his own responsibility for his actions. It just means that his responsibility for his actions doesn't diminish your responsibility for yours, even if your actions involve him.
It seems to be a common idea that we can just overlook the abuses committed by the other people we deal with, as things "I'm not responsible for", regardless of our actual ability to do something about them. I have no special insight, but I think it's a common idea because it lets us feel better about ourselves while we do nothing. But "feeling good about oneself" isn't a solid way to build or evaluate a moral framework.
Though I recognize depending on people's mental health it can be stressful to think about and if you can't then it's okay, one of my friends in particular was worrying about what she was buying to the point where it was a significant source of stress in her life and that wasn't good (though therapy for her general anxiety helped a ton so she's now concientious about what she buys while not stressing over it. It took her a while to get there though).
It is a form of trained helplessness to fixate perpetually on consumption.
If someone wants to do good in the world, go out and do it. help someone for real. I think it is lack of real connection that leads people to navel gaze about the third order consequences of their clothes or software.
I think this substack [1] summed it up perfectly:
>I was 16 when I realized I had to kill myself. I was in a Denny’s with my friends, looking at an empty glass of Diet Coke. The glass was produced by taking the raw resources of a foreign country, exploiting its workers in horrible factories, and sent to me to drink out of. And I didn’t really have any other option for getting liquid from a nearby water source into my body, it had to travel through moral atrocity along the way. It wasn’t just one glass, of course. It was everything. It was the shoes I was wearing (shoes were a big deal in those days) and the flooring I walked on and the food I ate. The only moral act was to kill oneself, and failure to do that meant you accept your role as a vicious monster. (The depression helped, but maybe the depression/guilt causality was reversed.)
https://deathisbad.substack.com/p/does-the-omelas-kid-have-a...
Right now in your community are tons of organizations looking for people to actually help.
I've restored nesting habitat for endangered birds. And I just happened to be able the beach when volunteers came around. That did more than stressing over what I bought ever did, and it was just hanging out at the beach. There are orgs for driving people to medical appointments. That can be an amazing impact on someone's life and on yourself (more than buying the right ketchup).
Make yourself financially strong so that you can help others. Sacrificing your money to make a point is wasted virtue signaling.
I mainly see people who shop correct/rescue animals as the most minimal helpers who want to feel they are helping. There is an old woman dieing crying in your town right now because she's overwhelmed and doesn't know how to get to an appointment she needs. An no one cares. But if I buy the right ketchup, that matters? If I drive 2 hours to save a dog (while the old woman dies crying and alone, unable to get to the doctor, a 15 minute trip) I'm a good person?
__If you buy gold from someone who poisons a river (to extract the gold more "efficiently"), soon your whole forest will suffer from deceases and degradation.__
You may feel tiny and powerless but it's sane and healthy to care for the whole ecosystem and think about aftereffects of everyone's actions.
you should shop at "walmart" or where-ever your dollar is the most effective. and that gives you the most stability and and position to challenge whether the current Walton regime's love of China is a good thing or not. but cutting your nose off to spite your face does nothing useful.
If that's not happening, then we need to fix the government so it does happen. Expecting each individual person to be their own EPA and research how every single item they consume is produced idiotic and doomed to failure.
> Expecting each individual person to be their own EPA and research how every single item they consume is produced idiotic and doomed to failure.
That's a false dichotomy. There are many middle grounds between researching every single item you buy and dropping the problem as a whole. You can focus on items which are most likely to bring negative impact, you can draw information from journalistic reports and material produced from dedicated associations. There are many ways to be sensitive to economic externalities of the things you buy without getting insane and without considering the whole problem moot on general phylosophycal principles.
Also consider: There are thousands of employees at Tesla and thousands of shareholders. Do you also need to individually vet every one of their opinions before you enrich them by buying a Tesla? What if they don't all have the same opinion? Are you supposed to take a poll and go with the majority? This is silly.
But it can certainly influence other people's perception of you... I think what we all have to decide though is how much that matters to us, should we decide to buy one anyway.
> Do you also need to individually vet every one of their opinions before you enrich them by buying a Tesla?
I think most people's negative image of a company/project tends to come from the leadership, or the most public leader, and not all the individual employees.
To that end I would consider Linux to be a tool mainly led by a habitually emotionally abusive person (Linus). Or when people mention Kitty I point out to them Kovid's many personal attacks on end-users, etc.
For some reason a lot of people in tech (and probably everywhere) seem to have real issues with staunch dogmatism and god complexes. I know people make mistakes and that's fine, but I'm talking about the ones that show consistent and daily life-long problems with usually no remorse.
You don't know everything, none of us do, and there can actually be other valid perspectives if you allow yourself to be wrong occasionally. Definitely not enough introspection/self-reflection going on IMO.
I'm sure people will downvote this but I don't think people should be forced to (or shamed when they don't want to) separate the art from the artist.
Yes, this is a concern, and it's a direct result of the phenomenon I'm talking about. There are violent, stupid people who will attack you because they think that buying a product means you endorse every political opinion every person who made that product ever had.
I'm actually looking to buy a car soon, and I've considered this in regard to Tesla. Do I want to deal with having my car keyed or painted or set on fire because of what someone thinks about Elon? Do I want to potentially put myself or my family in danger because someone thinks that attacking a random Tesla consumer is the best way to effect change in the world? And, frankly, no, I don't. But that's what I'm talking about. If you find yourself attacking strangers or destroying their property because you disagree with the politics of some CEO the person you're attacking has never met, you are in fact the bad guy.
The gas chambers are their most horrific deed, but Nazis were still Nazis before they gassed anyone. Therefore gassing does not define them.
The key to stopping Nazis is to do so before they get the gas chamber stage. If you let it get that far, you're too late. So you have to rely on other clues.
Nazi salute are about as oblique as you can get. They should have been a wakeup call.
As if "having the best car for you" is some sort of moral imperative or necessity, as if buying a less luxury vehicle is some sort of unthinkable option.
>You could write your Senator / Congressperson to support laws that would curtail Elon's actions.
Ah yes, tell the government that supports elon and that elon is part of to simply not do those things. Surely that is a workable option right now!
Just to honour the Godwin law, take the Eduard Pernkopf anatomy manual as an example, a fascinating example of this discussion.
There is always a tipping point where practicality beats purity, and I think it's ok trying to stretch it, respecting other's choices in the way of course. No need to judge.
* It's a heck of a lot of money to send to any company, so it makes more sense to pause and consider what you're funding. I can't put that much effort into every <$100 purchase without going crazy.
* Tesla is far more about Musk than Microsoft is about... whoever runs Microsoft these days. There's a very specific person tied to it.
* Driving a Tesla is seen by the world as a statement of some kind in a way that running Windows simply isn't. It's worth considering if that's a statement you want to be making.
If you know upfront that's what's going to happen, why wouldn't you have a degree of responsibility?
"You don't have all the details, he could be murdering a bad person"? Something like that I guess?
You think I can only understand the conditions if.. what? I've directly worked at the factory? Published a peer-reviewed study?
> You know that the workers would be better off not having the option of working in the Zara factory?
That’s not the only other option and presenting it that way is intentionally dishonest.
This entire line of thinking, as presented, is absolute sophism and bad faith.
When do you think you understand the conditions? When you watch a TikTok video about it? When you read an artistic the Atlantic? When you watch a segment 60 minutes?
It's not easy, but if you're serious about it is best done in community, with support and strategy. So, the opposite of main character syndrome, I would say.
It's also very odd that you take an analysis that is fundamentally systemic and translate it into purchasing from an individual psychopath - under what assumptions is that a valid comparison, one with any merit? It's not like corporations exist in a vacuum, only to emerge from the void to casually sell a single pen, the money with which they use to buy a single bullet. We as individuals, as communities, exist in feedback with the systems that we are a part of, including (surprise) corporations. So, yes, we have power to shape them, though (again) not easily.
The bus boycotts in the US Civil Rights movement are a good example. "Hey bus company, we're going to stop riding your buses until you end your racist seating policies". It's clear what they wanted to happen, and it was in the power of the boycotted company to make that happen.
This new thing is something else. Just a general "don't buy from this company because ... uh ... vague noises about evil". Like, what is it exactly you want this company to do? How will you not buying from them force them to do that? Do they even know what you're asking for?
This is not about trying to effect any sort of change. It is just plain virtue signalling so you can appear righteous to others. There is zero chance of anything happening in the world because of this.
Sure, there is definitely a performative thing out there, and maybe this is that.
My point is this - now is a time when we need more collective action, not less. So, rather than taking up space putting down someone who may simply not know what the next step is, why not give the world the energy that it so desperately needs? Now is a time to encourage people. What you (yes, you) put out in the world matters.
> There is zero chance of anything happening in the world because of this.
So far we've accomplished a 71% drop in profits, and we aren't letting up. This has caused him to turn tail from DOGE and to cry on his earnings call about it. We are having an impact, and it is impacting Musk's and Tesla's behavior.
There's a better viewpoint on that, though: ignore moral responsibility, think in terms of agency. Choosing from whom you buy is one of the few ways you (as an ordinary citizen) have to make the world a little steer towards a better form of itself. My own choice alone won't change much (which is correct, otherwise we'd be in an economic dictatorship), but if many people consistently care about that capitalism will work its magic and make wonders happen.
I think what you're not realizing is that most people don't care. They don't care and they don't think about it. They just scaffold really weak logic to justify the whole thing and then go about their day. So when you ask them they have convoluted reasoning why they're ok with it. This blog post is that convoluted reason.
Ultimately the real reason is that we just don't care.
(And if you’re going to jump in the comments about them being evil, check your privilege. None of these tech companies operate literal death squads as several non-tech companies did as recent as a few decades ago, and probably still now.)
Absent government will (which has been the reality for decades), we have no way of stopping this bad behavior than to stop funding it. But since nearly every company is engaging in bad behavior, "stop funding it" means becoming a hermit and not buying anything, which is also not feasible for enough people.
Don't play that game. You aren't a consumer you are a human being. Today you can impact for the positive. Choose your shopping based on savings/health, and invest that money into your local foodbank or helping someone at something like Kiva.org (I don't keep up, is Kiva bad now?) or other local charities where you can actually have an impact.
It's crazy how people have been convinced to give up and do the most barely needle moving things to feel moral.
For your own sanity, please let this go. You are responsible for your own actions. If you buy a pen from a psychopath and he uses the money to buy a bullet and shoot someone, that’s not your fault. He’s responsible for his actions.
It’s like everyone somehow forgot that other humans are sentient beings with their own agency. Main character syndrome run amok.