this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
30 points (87.5% liked)

UK Politics

3103 readers
141 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

reading that was like watching a person trying to throw a stone at the sky and missing

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Haha funny joke but they have a point. They would achieve so much more if they actually did something rather than this sort of thing. There are actual people who are actually trying to implement political policy they could join them. Smashing the case doesn't seem to achieve anything, by your own emission they didn't actually break it so what's the point. They literally did nothing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

The point is that ancient document only has value if there are still people around to value it. The point is that the political system is fundamentally broken and is easily gamed by those with money- who are, of course, staunchly opposed to anything that would interfere with their rent-seeking behavior, including and especially stopping the flow of oil. The point is that joining a volunteer organization or a political organization is, and has always been as long as I have been alive, mostly either a joke, or a bandaid-on-a-festering-wound solution, or both. The point is that people who vote are voting for their direct, usually short-term interests- having gas in the car is an absolute necessity for getting to work and thereby putting food on the table for a family. That's a difficult sacrifice to make, even if, in the long-term, people know it's apocalyptic. The point is that this document they targetted got them attention. The point is showing the world that they're willing to work outside of acceptable societal norms, sacrificing their livelihoods and freedom, for what they believe in. The point is that slowly, more people will recognize and find ways of resisting, even while still continuing to vote in a broken system whose first job is to uphold ancient broken irrelevant laws and perpetuate its own existence.

The point is that if we don't all do something, now, right now together, the world will fall apart.

Examine your conscience. Do you really believe that parliament will pass a law limiting the flow of petrochemicals? If you believe, as I believe based on the evidence I've seen in my daily life, that the world is getting hotter and it's because of burning petrochemicals, don't you think they should have already by now, and long since? If they don't, what do you think the people who are supposed to be represented should do about it? Do you really think voting will solve this by itself?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This document has at the very least value as an historical artefact regardless of how broken our current system of democracy is. Destroying it just turns more people against their cause. I understand they’re making a point about how the majority will not vote for policies which help the environment. Democracy is fundamental to creating a society where people have a say in how politics is done. Are you suggesting the government should push through policies that the majority are against? Even if they did they’d risk losing the next election. Or are you suggesting we get rid of democracy altogether? I’m not sure an autocracy would be a good thing overall even if they were working to improve the environment. Ultimately the issue is that the majority of people prioritise their current lifestyle over sustaining the environment. Enforcing policies which the majority are against isn’t really a healthy solution to this. If JSO want to change people’s minds, maybe focusing on educating people and non harmful protests would go a lot further than vandalising stuff and causing disruption.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

When I said it only has value when there are people to value it, I didn't mean the system would break further, I meant that we are in the middle of an anthropogenic mass extinction. They didn't succeed- two octagenarians were not meant to- but the next time they might actually try. They aren't looking for recruits, they are warning us. They are getting more desperate.

Am I suggesting the government do- no. If the system of government were going to take meaningful action to curb a global mass extinction event, it would have by now.

The government will do whatever it wishes, as it ever has. I advocate overthrowing the government. Revolution. Bloody, violent revolution if necessary. To whatever new system will take the existential threat seriously, and wield its vast inherited power to prevent that apocalypse. Autocracy, communism, whatever will not hum and haw and wait for a more convenient season to face toward annihilation with a bold face and take the difficult, necessary steps.

Educating people... Please: Listen to yourself. Read back your own words. "healthy solutions" instead of inconvenient lifestyle changes, the value of history over an existentially threatened future.

People dont want to be 'educated' by people they equate to doomsayers standing on the corner with a megaphone. And do you seriously think people havent been trying, for decades now to do that very thing?

The environment... people have been told its about the environment, and it is that. It is about the plants that are reducing in quantity and quantity in the stifling heat and soon not to be producing enough for everyone to eat. It is about the beetles and the earthworms who do their thankless toil maintaining the earth for those plants to grow. It is about the fish who choke on our waste and the fungi we prevent from accessing.

It is also about us. What will we eat? Where will our children play? What layers of ventilated plastic will we have to wear to survive the heat? We. Live. In. The. Envirnoment.

You want an education? Here's one few seem to know about, and I dont wonder why: Ocean acidification. CO~2~ dissolves in our ocean and the pH goes down. More CO~2~, more acidic. This in turn dissolves the shells of marine life. Those marine life produce almost 80% of the oxygen we need to fucking breathe. In combination with the burning, clearcutting and, generally, rape of the planet's forests and jungles that we might continue to eat fucking hamburgers, we will, sooner than anyone could possibly wish, Suffocate.

Fuck the magna carta, and fuck a democracy that refuses to let us come up for breath.

peaceful education, forsooth. this education is inherently violent, and I for one am tired of pretending it isn't.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bloody, violent revolution 🙌

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Is that really the only thing you took from that entire passionate-

we are doomed and we deserve it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)