DriveReduction

Nothing wrong with incremental change. But there's no justification it'd work in this context, and be worth the disruption.

And the burden of proof rests on the organizers to prove why this is worthy of prioritization above other problems.

While I like the sentiment and aesthetic of being courteous, I don't see anything demonstrating a binding rule or contract could come out of it. And what's the benefit again? If Amazon followed through, would the flooding and droughts cited in the original post stop?

The problem is - it just seems contradictory to me. I can't put my finger on why. I think supporter's heart is in the right place. But people are struggling a lot in life and this world in various ways, is this really the most optimal way to alleviate suffering?

Why not save the pay check and put it into lobbying, or NGO type stuff to advocate the cause? Or maybe even into studies or stuff more urgent that climate. For climate stuff to work, people in society have to have more harmony / generosity / collectivism universally.

Until people start getting along and addressing universal human needs and fixing those, it's really hard to do cooperative endeavors like this at scale. Just my opinion! :)

> Have you considered the possibility that Amazon actually treats their workers okay and that it's the organizers are dishonest? Why does the presumption of evil only go in one direction?

Yes.

As an example:

> We’re already seeing devastating climate impacts: unprecedented flooding in India and Mozambique, dry water wells in Africa, coastal displacement in Asia, wildfires and floods in North America, and crop failure in Latin America

That is so far removed from a company that provides web hosting and handles shipping logistics.

What does transporting a cardboard box have anything to do with flooding in Mozambique?

While it's unfortunate catastrophes happen. Let's be generous and assume those events are due to lax environmental regulations (0.001% to 90%).

Amazon is just 1% of whatever that is. So, if these activists wish came true - and ultimately a drop in the bucket.

A competitor without the hindrance could likely make up for any pollution they don't create.

If you want to shape ecology, you do it through regulations (statutes). And all countries need to be on board with it.

I'm going to have to go with management on this one - the exaggeration of Amazon's impact on the issue really hurts their credibility. Nothing wrong with climate change - but really against disrupting organizations needlessly.