Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow • Hacker News Board

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#131

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:35 AM UTC

stubish wrote: post #113

samcday wrote: post #109

The level of negativity and hostility in the comments here is really disappointing to me. I agree that XR are definitely pushing the envelope on what we consider to be reasonable activism and protest. However, I also think that the old adage "desperate times call for desperate measures" applies here. Yes, there are plenty of actions being taken to combat the damage we're inflicting to this little wet rock we all call…

Looking at this from another country, I would expect nothing else except blow back. My first thought is are we dealing with idiots, a false flag, or trolls. If this is where 'desperate measures' has led too, they are better off doing nothing. This sort of strike action isn't going to get the general population to vote green, but vote fascist.

It seems pretty effective (that's not endorsement) if you're talking about a small local protest from another country. Maybe they're actually not idiots but just people you disagree with?

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#132

Post by samcday » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:37 AM UTC

civility wrote: post #128

samcday wrote: post #109

The level of negativity and hostility in the comments here is really disappointing to me. I agree that XR are definitely pushing the envelope on what we consider to be reasonable activism and protest. However, I also think that the old adage "desperate times call for desperate measures" applies here. Yes, there are plenty of actions being taken to combat the damage we're inflicting to this little wet rock we all call…

> [...] or we're all doomed! When are we all doomed? Can you put a date (year) on it?

I'm going to assume you're joking here, this definitely made me chuckle :)

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#133

Post by Erlich_Bachman » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:39 AM UTC

samcday wrote: post #130

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe some of those extraordinary ways cross the line. But who decides what the line is anyway? Probably the people you inconvenience. A bunch of vegans disrupted traffic in Melbourne, Australia recently. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-08/melbourne-vegan-prote... I don't think they made many friends. It's really hard getting someone to change their mind or their thinking about an issue. But I firmly believe ac…

> I don't think they made many friends. I don't think they're interested in making friends. They're interested in trying to persuade more people to stop eating the flesh of sentient creatures when our diets don't even require it. > It's really hard getting someone to change their mind or their thinking about an issue. I agree. > But I firmly believe actively making enemies is probably not the way to go about things.…

> I don't think they're interested in making friends. They're interested in trying to persuade more people to stop eating the flesh of sentient creatures when our diets don't even require it.

And first making those people your enemies is a good way to persuade them to do it?

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#134

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:41 AM UTC

navigatesol wrote: post #120

adrianN wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without breaking laws and causing public nuisance India would still be part of the British Empire and African Americans would still be second class citizens. Climate change is a vastly more serious problem than either of those two.

> Without breaking laws and causing public nuisance India would still be part of the British Empire and African Americans would still be second class citizens. Every protest isn't the equivalent of India fighting for independence. > Climate change is a vastly more serious problem than either of those two. Fortunately, you don't get to decide which issues are "most important" to other people.

So, you're saying global extinction isn't important?

It's a tough line to swallow from the GP, but I wasn't expecting anyone to disagree that human effected climate change was important. Surely it's the most important issue humans have faced, ever?

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#135

Post by threw902309 » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:42 AM UTC

samcday wrote: post #127

dfawcus wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such actions are covered by the UK definition of terrorism: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1

Out of interest, are you a lawyer? I'm really struggling to see how you can interpret the language of the page you linked to include non-violent activism. Could you tell me specifically which sections of that legislation you think apply here?

Targeting critical infrastructure to get what you want is definition of terrorism.

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#136

Post by dagss » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:42 AM UTC

Veen wrote: post #129

macinjosh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your point? According to your link aviation emits twice as much CO2 than long distance road travel. Clearly limiting long distance travel would have an impact. Doubly so if aviation was reduced. Yet many global elites (Obama, Macron, et. al) agree to impose heavy restrictions on vehicle emissions used to feed, transport, and employ the average citizens of their countries. Meanwhile those who can afford it take…

The entire aviation industry accounts for about 2.5% of carbon emissions. If we banned air travel entirely it would do approximately nothing to reduce climate change. The single best thing people can do for the environment is refrain from reproducing, but that's not quite such an emotionally appealing thing to protest about.

That is exactly like saying that I only account for a billionth of the earths cO2 emissions, so there is no reason for me to cut emissions in any way.

The vast majority of the worlds population has never set foot in an airplane.

You have to calculate per capita.

2.5% is HUGE when divided by the number of people that make use of airplanes.

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#137

Post by Xylakant » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:43 AM UTC

Erlich_Bachman wrote: post #133

samcday wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think they made many friends. I don't think they're interested in making friends. They're interested in trying to persuade more people to stop eating the flesh of sentient creatures when our diets don't even require it. > It's really hard getting someone to change their mind or their thinking about an issue. I agree. > But I firmly believe actively making enemies is probably not the way to go about things.…

> I don't think they're interested in making friends. They're interested in trying to persuade more people to stop eating the flesh of sentient creatures when our diets don't even require it. And first making those people your enemies is a good way to persuade them to do it?

First of all, you need to make sure that the cause is known. Every demonstration, every strike, has the primary goal of raising attention. Yet, every strike, every demonstration inconveniences people and as such may make enemies.

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#138

Post by civility » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:45 AM UTC

samcday wrote: post #132

civility wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] or we're all doomed! When are we all doomed? Can you put a date (year) on it?

I'm going to assume you're joking here, this definitely made me chuckle :)

No joke. Is it 10 years from now, 100 years, or something else?

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#139

Post by samcday » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:46 AM UTC

navigatesol wrote: post #126

samcday wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, you are completely entitled to your opinions, but I'm not going to engage them because I don't think you're really interested in having an open discussion about this. Why do I say that? Because in response to a pre-planned demonstration from a group that has made abundantly clear that they intend to engage in acts of civil disobedience that are 100% non violent, you have used the words "drone attack", "ter…

> but it would mean a lot to me if you were to just consider for a moment your choice of words and what they say about your tolerance to people who hold different opinions to you. > I'm not going to engage them because I don't think you're really interested in having an open discussion about this. > I'm pretty confident I have absolutely no chance of changing your mind here What's that about tolerance of other's opin…

Well, for starters, you are literally quoting me out of context. How about quoting me properly instead of making yourself look ridiculous?

> Of course, you are completely entitled to your opinions, but I'm not going to engage them because I don't think you're really interested in having an open discussion about this.

I feel like I shouldn't need to point out how this disproves your implication that I'm not tolerant of other people's opinions. But maybe I actually do. Yikes. Acknowledging that someone else holds a differing view but choosing not to engage with it is something I consider completely reasonable. Maybe you don't, and hey, that's cool! It's your opinion after all :) In case it wasn't obvious though, due to my forceful tone, I do want to state unequivocally for the record that not only do I respect that you might hold opinions that are incompatible with my own, but I also accept your conflicting opinions are 100% valid. If I then come up with rebuttals (even if they're worded as angry internet justice warrior rants), it's not because I think you're fundamentally an idiot, but because what you're saying makes me angry enough that I want to try and get you to look at things a different way. That's not intolerance. That's social discourse.

> So far these people interfering with the airport operations have been compared to India fighting the British for independence, African Americans fighting for their civil rights and people hiding Jews from the Nazis. And you want people to take your arguments seriously?

Actually, I didn't make those comparisons. So why are you making strawmans of other people's arguments and using them to discredit me?

Re: Drones piloted by climate-change activists target Heathrow

#140

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 15, 2019, 9:47 AM UTC

samcday wrote: post #127

dfawcus wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such actions are covered by the UK definition of terrorism: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1

Out of interest, are you a lawyer? I'm really struggling to see how you can interpret the language of the page you linked to include non-violent activism. Could you tell me specifically which sections of that legislation you think apply here?

[deleted]