The universal principle of Kant's categorical imperative is likely this.
Something like, take actions that were the principles behind them applied to and adopted by all of society, that society would still be one you'd like to live in.
FWIW, I moved outta the city and bought a farm and it's been the best move of my life.
It sounds like you violated the very imperative you mentioned, though. If everyone did what you did, the world would be worse. This doesn't address the problem at hand.
First off, there's not enough land for the world's population to live like that. If everyone tried to do that, there'd actually be more stress because people would be fighting over their precious extra acre.
>Everyone here seems so insanely focused on carbon emissions
Given climate change and what drives it, is it any wonder? Creating some disasters in the future so we can have less stress now isn't a very good tradeoff.
It's like voting--if you know game theory, you know that voting is a waste of your time.
If I spent all my life avoiding "car dependence" at all, much less with the goofy fervor of the virtue-signalling green crew on the internet, I'd have roughly zero impact on climate change.
As it stands, I get to enjoy big ol' diesel trucks and dirtbikes and motorcycles.
Plenty of people don't enjoy these things and are happy sitting on the bus and enjoying things in cities, movie theaters or museums or whatever.
I just have different preferences.
Luckily, my preferences seem rare, so it's no worry.
Also, the biggest driver of climate change is the sun.
Something like, take actions that were the principles behind them applied to and adopted by all of society, that society would still be one you'd like to live in.
FWIW, I moved outta the city and bought a farm and it's been the best move of my life.