Now would be the time to point out that strawman.
Instead, you’ll scurry back under your rock because there isn’t one to be found here, and saying I’m “shillin for the destruction of our history” is an obvious, indefensible lie.
Now would be the time to point out that strawman.
Instead, you’ll scurry back under your rock because there isn’t one to be found here, and saying I’m “shillin for the destruction of our history” is an obvious, indefensible lie.
Yes - people protesting the climate apocalypse are the same as the oil barons, and I’m the moron.
BRB - picking up the law degree and plutonium contamination that would qualify me to do take any action in response to the apocalypse.
Hard work - got it.
…what hard work?
So there’s never been proportionate reporting on the issue.
Yet here we all are - talking about the protest and the apocalypse.
As we know, these protests prompt substantially more visibility and discussion than direct action.
So we rely on isolated groups quietly engaged in direct action at a scale we know for a fact is inadequate to solve the problem while calling for the arrest of people protesting the apocalypse in a manner that can be cleaned up in five minutes?
What’s your solution?
People throwing soup to protest climate change are doing more environmental damage than people burning fossil fuels in the dirtiest way possible because that’s their gender identity or whateverthefuck? You’ll need to explain that one for me, champ.
When has there ever been reporting on the subject proportionate to the threat of the literal apocalypse?
The idiots aren’t the ones throwing the soup - the idiots are the ones more concerned about jailing people for a mess that can be cleaned up with windex, a rag, and 5 minutes rather than jailing the people keeping us all on course for the literal apocalypse.
Mass data harvesting, inevitable data breach - oh look, you have genetic markers for some degenerative condition, and for some reason you’re now suddenly getting booted off your insurance and refused coverage.
I don’t think that’s true at all, but if it is, it becomes a question of whether that damage is outweighed by the benefit of the action.
Nah - let’s just feel superior by whining about people doing something to defer the apocalypse - both stunts to draw attention, and shutting down oil pipelines directly.
What are you even trying to say here? That any bastard with a camera and something to show will magically be seen, or that everyone with a smartphone is going to be aware of everything that affects them? Because neither of those things is remotely close to the way the world works.
You were aware of the JSO protesters shutting down the oil pipeline? If and that’s a big “if” so, do you think the average schmuck is? No. But chances are that they’re aware of the stunts like the soup.
You stop the problem from being buried under the fact that everyone is struggling to get by, or distracted by whatever the fuck the likes of the Kardashians are up to. You bring it to the forefront and prompt conversations like these - conversations where someone might realise that to stay the course on this one is to roll down the road to the apocalypse, and maybe they’d like to do something about that.
Assuming there’s no collateral damage to speak of, I’d argue it would be an act of self-defence for the benefit of all of us. In principle, I’d struggle to find reason to be upset by it.
Now with more hard ‘r’.
They’ve done that too, and have encountered media blackouts.
As nice as it would be if they could simply fix the climate problem with the disruption a handful of protests cause, they can’t, and need to draw public attention to the problem.
These demonstrations open up the conversation in threads like this - you agree there’s a problem, you agree these protests don’t fix the problem, so let’s talk about what will.
Ah yes - the world’s moral compass - the pinnacle of western civilisation killing people they have securely locked up where they can’t be a danger to the public… for what - revenge?
Look at the money being spent to satiate this thirst for blood compared to keeping them locked up - or shudder making any attempt to rehabilitate people to be a productive member of society.
There’s also the fact that if people hate him enough and realise how genuinely stupid the guy is, they’ll start wondering if the economic system that allowed him to amass the wealth of a country as millions starve might be doing it wrong.
You understand what a hilariously stupid position it is to insist that any action is invalid if it doesn’t follow the actions of these two specific people, and that anyone that doesn’t know Erin Brokovich didn’t pass the bar before starting her action has an invalid opinion, don’t you. I shouldn’t need to point this out, nor should I need to point out the importance of diversity of tactics, but here I am.