this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
385 points (92.9% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5239 readers
569 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you're the Presidential candidate for the Environmental Party I feel like it's the epitome of practicing what you preach. She and her husband having investments in oil is significant when your entire political position is antithetical to big oil. Accepting donations from Republican donor companies like Home Depot, and having multiple different politicians specifically say the Green Party is meant to siphon votes from the Democratic party.
If the Green party cared, it would be appealing to both moderates in their party. They do not. If the Green party cared, they would do more in between election years and fight for political positions beyond council members and mayors (4 total btw).
And if the Green Party cared, they would post a candidate who actually believed in what the party stood for by following the convictions of the Green Party and not having investments in big oil. And maybe one who had support in Congress to actually pass policy.
Edit: Their candidates are all you need to know, too. Kyrsten Simena was a Green Party member, who also was happy taking donations and making investments in oil companies. It's a pattern.
On some level it's reasonable to say that you own shares in a mutual fund, not shares in the individual companies.
But the other side of that is that you can fairly easily see what the mutual fund is doing, and copy it, without the problematic companies. Yes, it will be less profitable, but you can do it, and you can do it without too much difficulty when you're talking about millions of dollars in investments. So it seems, I dunno, weak to say that you can't divest your own personal investments from these things. Plus, I'm pretty sure that there are at least a handful of mutual funds that entirely avoid those kind of companies in order to attract ethical investors.