this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
189 points (94.4% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago (26 children)

At least someone is doing something. The governments are way to slow imho. Also, there is literally no harm done. So everybody hyperventilating in the comments should maybe calm down a little.

[โ€“] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (21 children)

At least someone is doing something

Yeah, actively giving talking points to right wing climate policy opponents and alienating the people that support their cause. That sure is something.

[โ€“] dukepontus -4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

If you support the cause you would understand no harm was done, and media attention was generated, as planned. If you want to have a excuse for your inaction you bitch on the internet about it.

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There was definitly harm done ... and I don't mean to stonehenge.

[โ€“] dukepontus -3 points 5 months ago

No harm was done to the stonehenge. No harm was done to the cause to stop climatechange. These actions get people talking about climate change, that is the plan and it was a succes. There are many different types of action that can be taken. Some people write letters, other consume less, etc. In the end they all work towards the same goal. But they require action. If you are not interested in changing the world and yourself for the better, no one can convince you. But if you want to create change, you will and you can. And then you will do so no matter what other people may think or do.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Negative reactions. I don't know anyone who identifies with these movements and actions, on the contrary. As someone who's trying to convince relatives to eat and act more sustainably, I feel it's an uphill battle because they don't want to side with these actions.

You're not being an activist, just an asshole and not just to the people you want to be an asshole to

[โ€“] Justas 3 points 5 months ago

Most activist organizations tend to do things that perpetuate themselves instead of trying to deal with the problem they are claiming to solve. That includes terrorist organisations too.

[โ€“] [email protected] -4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Now that's just BS, sorry. Not a single person who was on the fence of doing something against climate change will go "oh well but I didn't like the method of those protesters, now I won't do it".

The people who are constantly looking for excuses to do literally nothing are lost to climate action anyway. Every meaningful progress will have to be won against those people, not with them. If even slight inconveniences are too much to ask from them sure, they will shout and cry how this protest is the reason, but let's be honest: They were never going to be a part of the solution anyway.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

It's not BS it's reality. Especially for older generations, but not only, the way other people perceive them and their beliefs is important. If by supporting vegetarianism, climate advocacy, et. al they will be perceived as supporting these types of actions they won't do it. Is it stupid? Absolutely, but it's reality and a demographic of people you won't be getting for your cause and for climate we can't afford to lose credibility and supporters.

With this lack of nuance and understanding is how the left loses voters to the far right, and how activists lose supporters they can't afford to lose

[โ€“] [email protected] -5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The BS part is that they would have done anything helpful to the cause without the protest.

This is just another excuse. "People think I support throwing starch at Stonehenge" is not a reason to vote conservative and eat red meat at every meal.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We are trying to make people change the way they live and act, of course most of them will find any excuse to not do it. The "any attention is good" way of doing things is a far right tactic and shouldn't be used. It gives them the perfect excuse to not align with the beliefs and just maintain their ways.

[โ€“] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

That's not the tactic here at all. The people who are outraged aren't important. They will never participate meaningfully. Those people are and forever will be part of the problem. So it doesn't matter if they're angry now. This isn't about them.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok so what is the tactic here? They are vandalising a monument for what end if not attention? Talk me through the reasoning

[โ€“] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Gaining momentum within the movement, keep public attention high, pressure politicians to public statements, legitimise other forms of protests, encourage public debate, inspire involvement of people who generally support them, to name a few.

On the other hand there isn't a single form of protest that wouldn't be either ignored or used as an excuse for inactivity by the people you claim to want to reach. Or could you name even a single example that would make them actually do something?

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

keep public attention high

There it is. You want attention no matter if it's positive or not. Which type of support do you expect to gather by vandalising monuments? Encourage public debate by vandalising monuments?

Normal protests, even if "angrier" would be better than this. Earn peoples' trust and respect

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Public attention to the matter of climate change. Sorry that I didn't spell it out for you.

Care to answer my question though? Because if you have not a single idea what form of protest could actually sway the people you claim to want to reach, we can just as well continue with the cornstarch.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Public attention to the matter of climate change. Sorry that I didn't spell it out for you.

Yes I got that but my point still stands, and you're still contradicting yourself.

Care to answer my question though? Because if you have not a single idea what form of protest could actually sway the people you claim to want to reach, we can just as well continue with the cornstarch

You should read my last paragraph slower then.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

So the people who go "I would have done something, but now that they painted stonehenge I won't" will suddenly change their way when they see "normal protest" as you call them?

Suuuure. Keep telling yourself that. You're not sounding ridiculous at all.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Right?

"I would have helped avoiding the apocalypse! But then some random guys sprayed paint on some things!"

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)