Those findings are crazy. I’ve never been social media addicted, been into luxury or general show-off brands (I pay extra to not look like I’m an advertisement… for anything but metal bands), so I don’t really know much about those issues.
Those findings are crazy. I’ve never been social media addicted, been into luxury or general show-off brands (I pay extra to not look like I’m an advertisement… for anything but metal bands), so I don’t really know much about those issues.
I don’t understand this. Telling someone to vote with their wallet is not helping. The equivalent would be that a victim was „told“ to defend themselves. I am saying we shouldn’t put the responsibility on the victim but the aggressor.
That I can agree to. Taking action is hard. But I would say that it is easy to broadly judge „most people“ while this very article says that in the case of social media, the boomers‘ blame for example seems to be ill aligned. Not the people are to blame but the mechanics.
deleted by creator
Yes, that is correct. People „should“. As they „should drive more carefully“, „smoke less“, „eat healthy“, „consume thoughtfully“ and so on.
We both know this is why we have the rule of law. People are not and will never be fully self governing as long as we have the system we do. We are much too stressed to make the right decisions every time. We used to be able to drive without a seatbelt on, to take cocaine whenever we wanted. Didn’t work very well. It’s simple psychology. Some of us govern themselves mostly well, others dont. That doesn’t mean they can be held responsible for their inability to do so. They need to helped with measures to keep harm away.
deleted by creator
In this case, we might slightly misunderstand eachother but seem to be mostly on the same page.
I still dont think the majority governs themselves well because we would be happily living in anarchy then.