241–250 of 260 posts
This is the exact type of short-sighted activism that steps the movement back; not forward. If you treat regular people like the enemy, expect to be treated as such. However, if you go into it calling attention to an issue using humor and goodwill, more people might join your cause. These people are idiots and remind me of PETA.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is largely my problem with climate activism. It seems largely based on what's fashionable. For example, ban straws in SF even though all of the ones in the ocean come from another continent[1]. Also stop offering glasses of water because there's a drought (strangely enough the drought ended but of course the laws stick around)[2]. Now a new deal which, even if 100% effective, would only reduce global CO2 emissio…
What does this have to do with fashion? It makes sense to ban single use plastics. What are your suggestions? 15% is leaps and bounds better than what anyone but Jay Inslee has suggested. Anyway that’s goddamn AMAZING for a single country. Also, 12 years is the best case estimate. The worst case is in the past, and I’ve seen good qualified arguments for at most ~4 years before irreversible climate collapse with curre…
And our climate predictions are just that, predictions. And they can definitely change[1] when you’re talking about geological time, though we often accept them as some sort of gospel.
1. https://www.dailywire.com/news/48287/national-parks-toss-sig...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not civil disobedience. Flying drones to shut down an airport is nothing like sitting in the white seats of a bus. That's a ludicrous comparison. Such drone attacks are dangerous (they do put aircrafts at risk), affect thousands of people, cause millions in damage, and, simply put, are lightweight terrorism. It is quite right that the article open with a reference to the IRA attacking Heathrow airport with em…
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…
Has anyone actually checked if extinction rebellion actually has any plans to fly drones round Heathrow? Currently we are taking a very vaguely worded article from the Economist at face value. Not to cast aspersions, but the Economist does talk a lot of bollocks sometimes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I respect people with different opinions. I do not respect people who try to impose their opinions through criminal and reckless actions. By the way, I have not likened their actions to the IRA's, the article does that based on fact. That's obviously a very disturbing and inconvenient fact to you but that's a fact nonetheless. Again, what they are doing is not civil disobedience and has no place in a democratic count…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry that my forceful language offended you so much. Let me assure you I am 100% not a fascist :) Democracy doesn't actually work a "certain way". There's many forms of democracy all over the world. Given that they're a human construct, one thing they all share in common is that they're deeply flawed in every permutation. I'm not interested in throwing anything away. I'm interested in iterating on what we have a…
> democracy .... is ... deeply flawed in every permutation. > striving to make it better And you are going to fix it... But voice you have does not have enough punch... And desperate situation requires desperate measures... Still f*k you.
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…
> Because in response to a pre-planned demonstration from a group Has anyone actually checked if extinction rebellion actually has any plans to fly drones round Heathrow? Currently we are taking a very vaguely worded article from the Economist at face value. Not to cast aspersions, but the Economist does talk a lot of bollocks sometimes.
And yes, this is factual and does not come from the Economist: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48470623
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll gain a lot of perspective if you listen to this interview: https://teamhuman.fm/episodes/ep-127-extinction-rebellion/ Some tidbits: your comment is like saying "there surely must be less painful ways for your body to tell you to be more careful with a hammer" In a trivial sense, it's true. But real pain and annoyance is exactly what it takes for people to prioritize dealing with a problem. These sorts of thing…
I'd be curious if there is any correlation to people's daily routines being disrupted and then having any sympathy for the protester's cause. I mean, who is going to get stuck in the air for an extra hour, land, and say "man, those guys are right". At worst, it would just make me feel contempt for them. At best it just invigorates the people who already were on their side.
Really, listen to the podcast.
There are indeed lots of questions about the right way to do this.
When your body flares up like crazy over an allergy, many people indeed get contemptuous about their own immune system rather than just hate pollen. So, it's not like just any and all mayhem in the name of a cause is helpful…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll gain a lot of perspective if you listen to this interview: https://teamhuman.fm/episodes/ep-127-extinction-rebellion/ Some tidbits: your comment is like saying "there surely must be less painful ways for your body to tell you to be more careful with a hammer" In a trivial sense, it's true. But real pain and annoyance is exactly what it takes for people to prioritize dealing with a problem. These sorts of thing…
Sure, but the less painful way of dealing with this problem is to charge them with terrorism and lock them away on life sentences. Sure others may try, but after a couple rounds of this, volunteers will stop. You can get young men to take great risks for great rewards, but not to rot in a prison cell somewhere with no hope of anything.
If you abuse terrorism charges and make it so no protests of anything are ever really disruptive, things that threaten the long-term stability and health of society will go unaddressed until they actually cause far more catastrophic problems.