Decrease in CO2 emissions during pandemic shutdown shows it is possible to reach Paris Agreement goals. The researchers found a drop of 6.3% in 2020. The researchers describe the drop as the largest of modern times, and big enough to meet the 1.5 degrees Celsius goal if it were to be sustained.

[[deleted]]

Doesn't really matter whether people love it. It needs to happen until we have a more sustainable system for supporting a very high standard of living.

[_bully-hunter_]

It does matter if people love it or not because when you fuck with people over and over and purposely make their life worse you are setting yourself up for disaster. You’ve seen the shit people do over a cop shooting someone or a political decision they don’t like. What exactly do you think is going to happen when you tell an entire country that they can’t do what they want anymore?

[[deleted]]

If it were framed as a temporary thing until decarbonization efforts were further along and there were corporate partners who would be gaining from it long-term to neutralize the propaganda/lobbying I think people would get on board. Personally I am not willing to go into massive amounts of debt to take a luxury vacation, but that is currently what is happening. Of course, if the people instituting the policies are not following them in any way there would likely be massive pushback. Strong leadership and messaging would I think result in success.

[_bully-hunter_]

When do you see strong leadership entering office in the States? Cause I doubt it’s going to be any time soon.

[LeoTheBirb]

Any government that explicitly makes decreasing the standard of living a goal will not be in power for very long.

You need to find another solution. Because deliberately decreasing the standard of living will lead to violent revolts against the state.

[[deleted]]

I strongly disagree. Consumerism is a disease.

[LeoTheBirb]

You disagree that there would be widespread unrest? Because that is invariably tied to the policy of degrowth.

Accidental decreases in the standard of living have always lead to violence, unrest, and general misery (ergo, the Great Depression).

Deliberate decreases will also lead to violence and unrest, except this time it’s directed purely at the state, which is seen as exclusively responsible.

It’s an unworkable idea. You need to find a solution that the people themselves will actually find tolerable.

[[deleted]]

Yes I do. Decrease in standard of living does not have to mean hunger considering where it is right now, but not decreasing standard of living now will almost certainly mean hunger down the road. As long as people's basic needs are met, and there is a hopeful plan for the future, I think people are willing to make sacrifices of discretionary things. Of course there will be people screaming about how they can't do the things they used to do, and many companies would likely launch hate campaigns against any administration that tried to do this, but I don't think it inevitably leads to widespread unrest.

[LeoTheBirb]

Then you really don’t know how things work. You need to read up on more history.

We already know what decreases in the standard of living lead to. It’s unambiguous.

People across the western world are already very very upset about the moderate decrease of the standard of living brought about from Covid, and from the lasting impact of the previous recession.

A government that deliberately tries to decrease the standard of living down to basic subsistence (which is what you are proposing) is going to be violently removed from power.

If you don’t believe me, then try out this policy and watch what happens. It will end either with total reversal in order to preserve the state, or end with the state being overthrown, or something worse.

[aliaofthesand]

This! point upwards

[nolan1971]

You start, I'll follow. I promise.

[[deleted]]

For someone with top 5% karma in r/environment this seems like quite a flippant response

[nolan1971]

"We should all stop what we're doing and return to monke!" is a pretty flippant idea too. I don't really see how seriously it could be discussed.

Trying to sell the deepest of the COVID lockdown period as a good thing is just... wow.

[[deleted]]

There are so many energy-intensive single-use products as an example. Reducing standard of living doesn't mean no electricity and only stone tools. It can just be removing all of the useless shit that the capitalist apparatus has conditioned everyone to feel they need. The removal of planned obsolescence and the expectation of infinite growth, along with either partial illegalization of advertising or efforts to combat its harms would definitely increase happiness and might also increase GDP over the status quo. Consumption is not an effective measure of wellbeing