Yeah. Pretty much.

I read this article. It is completely wrong. The fact is, we do not know how "partial" action affects the big stuff like global warming. It may be useless, or it may help. It may even be harmful, though not likely. But we do know this: birds that swallow small amounts of plastic die horrible deaths; deforestation even on a small scale kills off entire species and invites poachers; using reclaimed wood probably saves whole families of animals and reuseable products that use close to zero waste probably saves dozens if not hundreds of lives. How can he say that small steps do not work? It's absurd.

I completely agree. I'm all for individuals taking steps to be more environmentally friendly, but ultimately it is not individuals who are causing the vast majority of pollution and destruction - it is corporations. Capitalism is not sustainable, and it never will be. It is based on exploitation of resources and workers. Only a drastic change in our political and economic systems will do anything to protect the environment (and people).

I agree, Emmi. It is absurd - and full of political slants that are hidden between what the writer thinks of policies and progress. I hope that this is an opinion editorial and not him assuming his economic analysis is factual.

Change only occurs when a lot of dedicated people force it to happen. Many people chosing recycled paper goods (or not at all) do make a difference. Imagine how much less waste is generated by a company like 7th Generation compared to Clorox.

@Electrickate yes and they didn't even allow comments for the NY Times article.....

This is just depressing. And the last thing people need is to be down & discouraged from doing good.
I believe in the butterfly effect. All of us as individuals, together, can make a difference. Every effort matters.

I'm only responding to the excerpt, didn't read the whole article, but I totally agree-- and so do the majority of people who devote their careers to environmental activism. The individual recyclers are great, and we certainly need all of the self-identified environmentalists that we can get, but until we enact laws that provide incentives for protecting the environment and stiff punishments for harming it (like countries like Germany have done) will we really achieve any large-scale change.

And to build on petworthy's comment, it's the individuals who make their voices heard that eventually get corporations and governments to change. Although I suppose that may as naive and idealistic as thinking individual actions can add up.

Legislation is only serves as the floor to bring up the worst actors, but that floor needs to be raised a whoooole bunch.

Talking about going nowhere - that article surely is.

It rants about what people are doing wrong, but the only presented solution is "learn more about the economy!"

"Basic economics" have led our society to exactly where it is today. Our schools that teach economic theories have no idea how to address the simple fact that we've been getting a free ride off the planet's resources, and that they're soon going to get harder to use. We don't need "basic economics," we need entirely new forms of economic thought.

I have to say one part of the article is true, that in this oligarchy of America, the big corporations must be stopped before we can save the environment - however the author's dismal view of individual action was wrong and uncalled for.

Nobody likes to be told their actions have no impact and their sacrifices mean nothing. It is unfortunate that the author's valid point about the need to understand the complex economics involved in conservation, reuse, and recycling for millions of people and communities was lost to some, due to the author's attention grabbing but off putting opening paragraphs.

agree that it is "full of political slants that are hidden between what the writer thinks of policies and progress":

«Our future will be largely determined by our ability to admit the need to end planetary socialism. That’s the most fundamental of economics lessons and one any serious environmentalist ought to heed.»

erm...

the writer must have skipped his school lessons...havent we read- little drops make the ocean...its on my our part to increase the number of drops