I listen to NPR/MPR when I am in the car. Which, to be fair, isn1’t that often these days. only to go grocery shopping, which is once or twice a week. One time, I heard a panelist talking about how people tend to think too much of the impact they have on the world. We like to think that what we does matter–when it doesn’t really, in the big scheme of things. She was…a mathmatician/data analyst of some sort I think?
Today, I heard a woman say we liked to have a clcar hero and a clear villain. She said history is not about that, but more about the choices individuals make. This was in relation to the desegregation of schools. How, yes, the KKK were involved, but it wasn’t as if non-KKK white people weren’t thinking and saying similar things.
I mention both of these because they seem to be at odds with each other. I will say at the outset that I agree with the first woman more than the latter. But, I do agree with the second woman that life is not a Marvel movies. It’s not, ah, Iron Man versus Thanatos. There are way more people who are just middling, and, yes, the choices we make matter. Sort of.
This is where it gets sticky. Let’s take environmental concerns. We’re fucked. We are past the point where we can save the earth. This has proven to be true. But, let’s pretend that we can do something about it. In that case, it would behoove us for everyone to do something. But, here’s the thing. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. The first two are more important than the third, which is the one corporations push. Why? Because it doesn’t affect their bottom line whereas the first two do.
Recycling doesn’t help. Much. It doesn’t hurt except that we’re running out of room to put the recycling. There is harm, however, in the messaging that if you recycle, then everything is all good–environmentally, I mean. There have been too much emphasis on recycling when the results are minimal.
There was a letter on Ask A Manager from someone who went way overboard in recycling at their place of work. Other people were casual about it, and they did not like it. They went digging through the trash to put the reclying in the right bin. That is odd, but fine because it’s mostly just about them. But then they got mad because it didn’t make a difference. the person(s) was still doing it. So they put it on top of the bins rather than sort the trash. They rationalized it by saying that they were doing it for the children and the planet, and someone had to.
Side Note: I hate ‘but the children, though’ as an excuse. It’s used to cover up a lot of bad behavior, and it’s something adults hide behind way too often.
In other words, they were a sanctimonious jerk about it. In addition, they didn’t actually know who did it. Thye just assumed that putting the trash on the bins would make the offenders recognize their junk and put it in the right bin. Which, I mean, that’s just bananapants. I mean, if it’s highly specific trash, maybe they would regcognize it, but if it was just something from a chain, then how are they supposed to be able to tell?
In addition, they were making things worse for their coworkers by leaving trash on the bins. For context, they also complained about coworkers not doing the dishes in the sink and leaving everything a mess. Which, yeah, not great–but not directly their problem. Or not only their problem.
Here’s the point. They have many issues with their company including that they are severely underpaid, and this was the one thing they could tangentially do. But, it was also that they had absorbed the mentality that ONLY THEY COULD PREVENT FOREST FIRES. Er, stop climate change.
They entered the comments and was very offended that people weren’t as passionate about the environment as they were. They could not grasp that people were focusing on their behavior, not their sentiment. They can believe whatever they like about the environment, but they had to be civil in the workplace. (Within limits, obviously. Like, you don’t need to be civil to someone sexually harassing you.)
Oh, that was why they wrote tthe letter to Alison. Someone complained to HR, saying they were intimidated by whomever was leaving the garbage on top of the bins. The letter writer complained about that, saying why couldn’t the person just come talk to them? Which was ironic, don’t you think? They had spent a year-and-a-half putting garbage on top of the bins, which is very passive-aggressive. To be fair to them, they didn’t know who had put the recycling in the garbage bin, but still. It wasn’t their business. They were not getting paid to sort the garbage. They were incredulous that anyone could feel intimidated by what they had done, but I understood. It’s incredibly hostile (in the common sense of the word) to put trash on top of bins every day for a year-and-a-half. I would be weirded out by it–if not intimidated. That’s just weird. There’s no way to say it other than that. It speaks of someone who is not aware of social norms, nor do they care. Also, it’s clear the person is angry and bitter, and that is not pleasant to be around. And, as commenters pointed out, leaving garbage of any kind on top of the bins is disgusting.
The OP did write in with an update, but it was only to say that they kept their mouth shut and just did their job, but were still severely underpaid. They felt ostracized and alone, but they didn’t feel they could do anything about it. I end up feeling sorry for them, but the point stands. They were way too invested in something that in the end, didn’t even matter.
At the same time, there is a tipping point. Not with this issue, necessarily, but with many. One person protesting won’t do shit. A hundred thousand people? Maybe. A million or more? Well, that will make people stand up and take notice. It’s all a matter of degrees.
I don’t know where to draw that line, honestly. I tihnk we should encourage people to be involved because it’s better for society in general. But does it matter in the end? Not sure. Jury is still out.