• Oisteink@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    How can you be sure they don’t convince anyone? I’m not sure, but I think you made that up - as it matches what you feel

    • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      5 months ago

      Do you think it convinced the motorists who have beaten them and dragged them off the road by their hair? Or the people responsible for the preservation of Stone Henge? Or the wealthy people whose jets they painted? I can’t prove a negative, of course, or religion would be gone but you may be right, they may have convinced someone.

      • django@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        At least they tried, instead of just discussing the form of protest on the internet. History will prove them right.

        • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          And I built a straw bale house 20 years ago that saves 75% on heating and cooling over my next door neighbours smaller house. I am making a real difference by making personal changes instead of trying to ram my moral superiority down other people’s throats.

          • Poplar?@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            Fom the article:

            A single flight in a private jet can easily emit as much carbon dioxide as the average annual carbon footprint for an EU citizen – 8.2 tonnes

            Oxfam:

            The richest 10 percent accounted for over half (52 percent) of the emissions added to the atmosphere between 1990 and 2015. The richest one percent were responsible for 15 percent of emissions during this time – more than all the citizens of the EU and more than twice that of the poorest half of humanity (7 percent).

            I think what you built is legitimately cool but your efforts are erased many times over by a single flight these people take. I think thats enough to suggest you shouldnt empathise with the rich being given an inconvenient message, not that it was meant to change their minds, its to raise awareness in us, the general populace.

            Also, we need systemic change, not just individual effort. We will have energy needs irrespective of how efficient we make things, and political pressure is how we will force away from fossil fuels.

            • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              No doubt. My point was that I’m actually taking concrete action to dramatically reduce my own carbon footprint rather than pissing off a bunch of people whose support I really need for my cause by trying to ram my misguided sense of moral superiority down their throats.

              • Poplar?@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’m actually taking concrete action … rather than pissing off a bunch of people

                Yes and this is an example of a justified campaign for some systemic change, something quite different from what you’re doing. I’m sure you’ll agree that once it is them causing a huge amount of damage, inconveniencing them is ok if it gets a message to them, and gets people talking about a non-proliferation treaty and the harms of private jets?

                whose support I really need for my cause

                I’m not entirely sure what you mean here. But they won’t be drawing up new laws. And we can’t rely on their good will seeing all the cases of companies focusing on their bottom line while knowingly harming people and the environment.

                • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Yes and this is an example of a justified campaign for some systemic change, something quite different from what you’re doing. I’m sure you’ll agree that once it is them causing a huge amount of damage, inconveniencing them is ok if it gets a message to them, and gets people talking about a non-proliferation treaty and the harms of private jets?

                  I love the fact that you used the word justified here.

                  “Anything that I do to __________ is justified because I’m __________ superior.”

                  That’s self-absolution which is the hallmark of extremism.

                  A handfull of extremists gluing themselves to the road and throwing things at works of art aren’t going to change the world. They’re going to piss people off and get arrested and jailed and the world will move on. You need BILLIONS of people on board to get real change to happen and this is NOT the way to do it. Sure, it makes them feel good and they can sit around in a discussion circle and talk about how pissed off they made the people they were delaying but that’s not going to make change happen.

                  • Poplar?@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Anything that I do to …

                    But I never suggested anything so extreme, now did I? I argued that one harmless act they did was justified given the context of who they did it to, not that absolutely anything they do would be justified.

                    … aren’t going to change the world.

                    No one has ever claimed they and the stuff they’ve done is all it takes to solve these issues. They are a group that is part of a movement, and what they are doing is part of the work that is needed to bring about change.

                    You can’t just look at the acts, you need to look at their effects. In a democracy, you need to raise awareness and pressure representatives to bring about change. Which is what they’re doing by spray painting private jets and other vandalism they did.

                    You need BILLIONS of people on board …

                    I don’t know why you think that. Do you think countries held referendums before deciding to shift to more renewables, pass green taxes, etc.? They haven’t, and obviously they won’t.