Monday, March 04, 2019

AOC Has Giant Carbon Footprint; Says She's Just "Living In The World"

This sort of criticism seems to be a kind of consistency ad hominem.
   My inclination is to think that such criticisms are fairly weak.
   I'm not so sure about the "just living in the world" response, though. I'd be more inclined to say: if you're trying to save the world from the carbon-emissions apocalypse, and you can do that more efficiently by emitting more carbon, then, within reason, it's probably a good deal. AOC by herself is not contributing in any significant way to carbon emissions. No matter what she does personally, it won't matter. The same, of course, goes for all of us individually. But her actions could have an effect on what everybody does collectively. So, by taking a plane instead of a car or a car instead of a bus, she might be able to make a difference in what we all do. And that would make a difference.
   In short: Al Gore flying to Davos might, conceivably, save the world. And so I think it's silly to criticize him for doing so.
   As for the a/c and hamburgers...well...I don't see any way to defend them there.


Anonymous Critical Spirits said...

I agree that to count AOC's carbon footprint as an objection or counterexample to, say, the Green New Deal is seemingly clear-cut example of the consistency ad hominem.

Still, there's something contemptible about a person whom advocates for x, and then performs non-x behaviors anyway. Think: "smoking is eeeviillll" from the guy who chainsmokes a pack of cigarettes in his time off from warning teenagers about the dangers of smoking.

If we make it clear that the criticism is a criticism of AOC's *character,* then I think it holds more weight. But, as you point out, it's not clear how much weight we ought give it in the first place.

11:28 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home