I do hope this doesn't come across as just a cynical rant you can dismiss on my snark and cynicism... I have to admit it's difficult to completely avoid cynicism having seen the world transform from what I remember of the seventies...

Whilst I agree in good part with the theme of having little impact on the world, we should be good guardians after all, I have to say you completely miss the right target. You even mention a good part of why - the community that we once depended on, and gave leverage, is mostly not there any more. Not there as a matter of policy.

40 years of neoliberal Thatcherite, low regulation reform has given you more freedom of choice, or the illusion of choice, without individual or communal power. Markets value the behemoths wrought by globalisation, and trade agreements that place the corporate above the government. The individual whether individual householder and shopper or the individual nation matter less. I can't remember a time in my life where the end customer was less powerful, their views and wishes less relevant. Communal or community bodies died on that hill too.

When my parents went shopping the baker, butcher and greengrocer etc were usually individual shops, sourcing from a local wholesaler or farmer, and there were fewer national products. Five or ten people complaining about the bags or wrapping would probably at the very least have the shop keeper questioning his choices. You think Walmart cares about a dozen people buying their loose veg elsewhere? They'll win on monopoly or price in the end anyway.

It's reflected in the choices coming from every multinational that serve their need far more than ours - and in consumer frustration in those limited choices whether phone size, fixed batteries, non-repairable laptops and fridges, using plastic to cheapen and shorten life, DRM in the car, or just every single simple item coming in shrink wrap or plastic pack.

> if avoiding buying plastic will improve your life and reduce demand, why not do it anyway

Sure improving one's own life is valid, but it won't reduce demand. Not unless you get 125,000,000 of your closest friends to join in. Individually you are so irrelevant you are not even a rounding error. Achieving change needs a popular Twitter movement not individual action. What you might get is countless examples of greenwashing.

Even a popular boycott against a multinational may not matter much if they can just start promoting in other parts of the world instead. See the tobacco industry for examples.

The USA discovered and started to exploit fracking, and it's transformed US oil security - that's well known. The American Chemical Council (the industry trade body) are delighted to tell of the hundreds of billions invested in new plastic production on the back of that. Here's a 2017 piece of $180bn in new plastic production[1]. It's now well past $200bn of new production. You will have more plastic in your life - you just haven't been marketed to yet. You won't be given a choice. Check the ACC's news pages[2], filled with pushes against any hint of responsibility of use. I'm sure many nations have equivalents. I'm sure they are spending extensively on lobbying.

> Besides it will lead others to change and can lead to politicians realizing voters want regulation

This really, really is not how it works.

Food safety legislation, the clean air acts, our pollution laws all came from the top. Not from individuals trying to not buy coal, or avoiding alum laden flour. From government and politicians realising it went too far and were willing to constrain commerce. From demonstrations and meetings in constituencies having them realise "do something or I may not get elected". Politicians who often still actually gave a shit about making the world a better place anyway. In a world that was lobbied far less, and the revolving door between commerce and politics was at least discrete.

Regulation has been made unacceptable bugbear. We have to rediscover some, and soon. 40 years of reacting against the oil-shock caused chaos of the seventies is far more than enough.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/26/180bn-in...

[2] https://www.americanchemistry.com/News_and_Resources/?topic=...