Individual🌡 Climate Action ✊

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/27148108

The first follower closes a reinforcing feedback loop and makes it easier for the next person to also break from norms and join in. Each subsequent person joining the movement makes it easier for the next person to join, and so on, creating an amplifying effect. If that amplification is strong enough, it can reach a tipping point. At a critical mass, the social incentives reverse, and change becomes self-propelling.

archived (Wayback Machine)

I made this a "climate action individual" post because a "library economy" is made of individual actions - borrowing a tool instead of buying one, sharing your books with the neighborhood, etc. Bottom up instead of top down.

The LaTeX scrlttr2 class is useful for using and re-using windowed envelopes. If the envelope is standard, the geometry may be known to the supplied KOMAscript machinery. If not, a few measurements can be given as parameters to align an address in a custom window.

To load the US №9 standard envelope, you would start with:

\documentclass[UScommercial9]{scrlttr2}

or for the French standard:

\documentclass[NF]{scrlttr2}

DIN is the token for the German standard.

If you reuse a non-standard windowed envelope, you can put the following in the preamble and tamper with the measurements as needed:

\makeatletter
\setplength{foldmarkhpos}{4.2mm}   % default=3.5mm; distance from paper edge to fold mark; should account for the unprintable area of your printer
\setplength{tfoldmarkvpos}{108mm}  % default=99mm; distance between top fold mark and top paper edge
\setplength{firstheadwidth}{190mm} % default=170mm for NF and \paperwidth for others; width of letterhead
\setplength{firstheadvpos}{10mm}   % default=15mm for NF; distance from top edge to letterhead
\setplength{toaddrvpos}{40mm}      % default=35mm; distance between top of window and top paper edge
\setplength{toaddrhpos}{98mm}      % default=-10mm; distance from the left edge of the paper to the address field (if positive)
\setplength{toaddrindent}{5mm}     % default=10mm; left and right indentation of the address within the to-address box
\setplength{toaddrheight}{40mm}    % default=45mm
\makeatother

UPDATE:
Word of caution: someone in Mastodon once posted an envelope they received in the UK from their hospital that had a quite big window, and at the bottom of the window under his address was “the results from your colonoscopy…” in full view of anyone handling the envelope.

So indeed, privacy snafus happen. LaTeX’s default and normal settings never result in that kind of leak, but if you do a lot of manipulation to fit a lot of text on the first page, that sort of exposure is within the realm of possibility.

“It is our duty to induce people, by every honest means, to go Vegan.”

archived (Wayback Machine)

the facts

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/22921894

Across four different experiments he could see that perceived unfairness - especially when the tax was proposed to be distributed in an unfair way that would make poor people pay disproportionally much, compared to richer groups and corporations - not only limited support for the proposed climate taxes, it also made the participants perceive the taxes as less effective and lowered their trust in policymakers.

archived (Wayback Machine)

archived (Wayback Machine)

A reminder folks: people engage in this kind of radical protest because it works:

Results of two online experiments conducted with diverse samples (N = 2,772), including a study of the animal rights movement and a preregistered study of the climate movement, show that the presence of a radical flank increases support for a moderate faction within the same movement. Further, it is the use of radical tactics, such as property destruction or violence, rather than a radical agenda, that drives this effect. Results indicate the effect owes to a contrast effect: Use of radical tactics by one flank led the more moderate faction to appear less radical, even though all characteristics of the moderate faction were held constant. This perception led participants to identify more with and, in turn, express greater support for the more moderate faction. These results suggest that activist groups that employ unpopular tactics can increase support for other groups within the same movement, pointing to a hidden way in which movement factions are complementary, despite pursuing divergent approaches to social change.

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/22442359

• In Michigan, food waste is fueling climate change as methane emissions from landfills soar. Ranking 8th nationwide for food waste landfilled, the state sees 58% of fugitive landfill methane emissions stemming from discarded food.
• Volunteers and organizations are stepping up, distributing food to those in need, tackling pre-consumer waste, and advocating for composting and rescue efforts.
• Yet, Michigan's policy landscape remains sparse, with limited and uneven implementation hindering progress.

archived (Wayback Machine)

Share what you can, compost what you can't.

archived (Wayback Machine)

Once a month between April and October, a group of stitchers takes to the streets of Edinburgh, making themselves comfortable on camping chairs decorated with hand-embroidered banners inviting people to #stitchitdontditchit. Equipped with sewing baskets and mending skills, they repair their garments in public and teach interested passers-by how to do the same.

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump doubled down on his long-standing complaint about low-flow showerheads taking too long to clean his “beautiful hair.” He ordered his administration to repeal a rule, revived by the Biden administration, that aimed to save water by restricting flow from the fixtures. A White House fact sheet promised the order would undo “the left’s war on water pressure” and “make America’s showers great again.”

Efficiency standards used to have bipartisan support. But today, many Republican politicians see restrictions on gas stoves, refrigerators, and laundry machines as symbols of Democratic interference with people’s self-determination. That’s the idea Trump advanced when he signed an executive order targeting efficiency standards for home goods and appliances “to safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose.” The message echoes talking points from industry groups that have an interest in keeping homes hooked up to natural gas for stoves and water heaters.

"This isn’t the first time that we’ve seen efficiency standards thrust into the culture wars,” said Andrew deLaski, the executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, which advocates for stricter energy-efficiency legislation. “But President Trump has put that into overdrive.”

The scientific consensus regarding dietary change as climate and conservation solution has reached remarkable clarity, resembling the consensus on climate change itself both in evidential strength and in the organized effort to undermine it. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change explicitly acknowledges the critical role of reduced meat consumption in meeting climate targets. Studies in prestigious journals like Nature Communications, Science, and PNAS quantify the exact relationship between dietary choices and environmental impacts with increasing precision. As these findings permeate public consciousness, veganism continues its evolution from fringe lifestyle to rational response to planetary boundaries — a transformation accelerated by celebrity endorsements, documentary exposés, and social media. This scientific clarity renders continued resistance to dietary change not merely uninformed but actively anti-intellectual.

The psychological barriers to dietary change reveal much about human cognition and moral reasoning. Cognitive dissonance theory explains why individuals who consider themselves environmentally conscious often react defensively when confronted with evidence linking their food choices to ecological destruction. Rather than adjusting behavior to align with values, many adjust perception instead — minimizing the impact of meat consumption while exaggerating the difficulty of dietary change. Confirmation bias leads consumers toward information supporting continued meat consumption while discounting contradictory evidence. The “meat paradox” further complicates matters; many express concern for animal welfare while continuing practices requiring animal suffering. These psychological patterns highlight the insufficiency of information alone in changing behavior; effective interventions must address emotional and identity-based attachments to meat consumption rather than merely providing facts.

archived (Wayback Machine)