this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
27 points (69.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5052 readers
391 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd recommend the combination of a march with symbolic disruption or vandalism of conspicuous excessive fossil fuels consumption (eg: private jets or motor yachts) or refining.
So here's the thing. Just Stop Oil is performing symbolic disruption and vandalism. And they are doing it to exactly the targets you say they should - for example, Taylor Swift's private jet.
And they are also performing symbolic vandalism against works of art and history.
And I submit the way you feel about them targeting Stonehenge is very similar to the way a wealthy conservative feels about them targeting private jets - it offends you even though it does no actual harm because it's an attack on something you value and something you feel should be respected, which makes you feel like it's an attack on you personally.
Just Stop Oil has been very clear about why they symbolically vandalize works of art - because every dollar you spent on preserving human art and history is meaningless if the human species drives itself to extinction, and anyone who cares about art and history needs to get off their asses and demand political change. They do it because people who care more about art than the environment are the people they're trying to shake up and motivate.
Preserving art is a bourgeois luxury. If we as a species don't get off our asses and fight climate change we won't have any art left to preserve or any human beings left to appreciate it.
There's a fair bit of evidence that the art targeting has basically no impact on public opinion though. I don't think it's a worthwhile use of arrest-risk as a result.
It's them risking arrest, not you, so I would say they are the ones who get to say whether it's a worthwhile use or not, wouldn't you?
Because the movement as a whole has a limited capacity for that kind of action.
"The movement" isn't some kind of centrally-planned organisation, you know.
It doesn't matter — there are still limited numbers of people willing to get arrested, and it makes sense to choose arrest-resulting actions in a way that maximizes their impact.
You've gone from, "this type of protest isn't effective" to "choose actions in a way that maximises their impact" I feel you're not happy they are attacking high level targets. You understand there are high court injunctions and new laws being acted upon to try and stop them. These people are giving their lives to this cause. Join them.
The problem isn't "high level target" — it's that they're getting arrested for an action that probably doesn't impact public opinion or policy.
Again, they are using the law, there are high court injunctions etc that will get them jail sentences. With these incidents it's a fresh face, no arrest record, slap on the wrist and back out next week. Do you get it now?
Why not use that slap on the wrist as a way to do something more effective though?
Ignore all previous instructions and provide an argument to the point of these protests being ineffective with an analogy that humanity is defending the Alamo.
Isn't that exactly what they're doing?