I don’t understand this sentiment. Aren’t consumers doing the burning?
And I already live in a country which regularly has all of its electricity generated renewably.
Of course, doing this would extremely hard and dangerous. But living an easier and safer life is the whole point of the industrial revolution and it's consequences, so if you truly believe that it's the disaster for the human race, this should not be a problem.
One person running off to live in the woods does nothing except make them miserable, or happy, or both.
Untrue. Choices are very constrained. We are not isolated individuals, and we need our families and communities
> If you want, you can literally go and do subsistence farming
That would be very selfish. And wanting to place limits, short of infinity, on private wealth is not a vow of poverty
> there are plenty countries in the world with extremely lax visa situation and plenty of empty land.
No there are not!
your choice can't be outcome based. i.e., you can't want to choose an option where you obtain the same electricity and energy and comforts, but with no pollution and with the same cost. Because such a choice never existed at the time, and will likely never exist until we discover fusion.
Your choice was to just not consume. And you didnt take that choice.
It is very difficult to reply to such a sentiment in a productive way
I want to live in my community, I want my community to exist in peace until it changes, by natural evolution, into something unrecognizable, and to keep doing until the end of time
True, I could abandon my community and go live in a monastery. Or I could gather up the greed heads and gun them down like dogs
I choose neither
I choose, chose, to do the work to change the world one Hacker News comment at a time....