Following the Philip Agre subject, I noticed that the popularity of a resource on the Internet focuses on occurrences and entertainment in general. Something that happened in everyday life, or something funny, fun.
Texts with projections, such as the example cited in the Philip Agre case, always have little relative popularity.
The observation suggests the following and presumable conclusion:
Most people are "fear-oriented" and therefore look to yesterday and now for some defense.
Constant insecurity and fear sustain the habit of self-defense that reflects in all everyday actions.
In the absence of fear, or in its amenity, everything that amuses stands out.
The feelings of uncertainty and security do not reach a greater meaning for the projections, as the difficulty of dealing with today makes tomorrow even more uncertain for the practical meaning of life as the perception overloaded by the now occupies the space of everything else.
Yesterday and today come to the sure solution of inspiration to satiate the uncertainty and fear with which people live.
Perhaps, this mass psychological characteristic is responsible for the difficulty of popularizing preventive collective actions, mobilizing public opinion in favor of people themselves.
There was little or no repercussion as long as the news was scientific projections about the need to reduce the carbon footprint in the atmosphere to prevent global overheating.
As the catastrophe advances in the daily lives of the masses, in their day-to-day lives, then they are slowly reacting to the need to change their habits.
Unfortunately, the masses struggle with their own inertia, transferring the responsibility for part of their actions to the politicians.
In democratic or democratized systems, politicians act under pressure from voters, depending on the popularity that their actions can achieve.
Popular slogans have an effective action relatively far weaker than the mass attitude.
Long ago, we could have started to change our habits to exert economic and political pressure that would have intensely accelerated the effectiveness of government actions.
That yes, it would have achieved much more intense practical results.
Useless “Summits” and climate meetings with insufficient or even non-existent practical results are the result of insufficient popular attitude towards this issue.
People are short-sighted by nature.
It is necessary to give them corrective lenses that convert the projections of tomorrow to today or yesterday, and thus gain the people interest in attitudes in the present that can change the future for the better.
The people wait for the people to take action.
It is something similar to the “critical mass” effect, where it takes a certain amount of people to contaminate all the people triggering the full mass reaction, or at least the majority.
Thus, we need to understand that the individual contribution is the beginning of everything, the change of politicians, the economy and the popular action itself, the latter being the engine that drives real solutions, whose practice will save our lifestyle that can still be very good.
What have you already changed in your habits to contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions?
So if you don't know what you can do for yourself, your beloved ones and the planet, try an Internet search.
For example, search for:
what to do to reduce co2 emissions
Yours and the world count on you.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário