this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
159 points (86.0% liked)

World News

37302 readers
1769 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If you ever wanted to read about fake druids vs. environmental activists, now's your chance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AA5B 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

As always, while I support their claimed ideals, I can only see them as petty vandals who care more about attention seeking than their cause. They certainly won’t get any of my time or attention. If you’re against Big Oil, protest Big Oil and half the population will agree. If you’re intentionally seeking my outrage with unrelated crap, you got it: rot in jail

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They do it because the stuff you're asking for doesn't work that well, but this does (that said they do still engage in those actions as far as I'm aware). Activism is about making noise, there aren't many tools beyond that and they've worked for all sorts of issues in the past.

The point is that JSO doesn't exist in a vacuum.

https://wagingnonviolence.org/2023/12/the-method-behind-just-stop-oil-annoying-madness/

[–] jj4211 1 points 1 week ago

the stuff you're asking for doesn't work that well, but this does

I didn't think that this works. The examples where people claim "is just like this" I don't see as being like this.

The ones that work are ones that have some relation to their cause. Forcing everyone to really think about an issue Inherent to the act. For example, going about and doing this to parked private jets, which they did.

Just doing anything to get attention isn't useful if there's no Inherent message in the act itself. Especially with climate where everyone already has awareness, just not action.

Being merely loud is not going to sway hearts and minds in your favor.

[–] kaffiene 4 points 1 week ago

It's orange power which washed off with water

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah I don't know why they wouldn't block the entrance to an oil refinery. Some people would be unhappy about this especially the people that work there. But the general public could understand, who knows it could possibly slow production for a few days.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

They have. Compared to this, it got barely any news coverage.

That is why they do this. Their only goal is attention, and they do that quite well.

The way they seem to operate is quite smart, actually:

  • Their stunts get a lot of press and bring climate change to the forefront of people's minds, frequently.

  • They're not a political party, so pissing voters off isn't a problem. They can afford to be unpopular to further the cause.

  • Those who already care about the climate won't change that based on a small group they dislike.

  • Those who call them "terrorists" are people who call anything short of licking oil company boot "eco-terrorism". They were never going to be convinced to care whatever the group does. Probably read the Daily Mail.

  • Those who are apathetic about the climate are still going to be apathetic, with a bit of rage towards this group as with the others, but again, ultimately that doesn't matter as they still won't change anything based on a single group.

  • A small handful of people will be inspired by them and their constant reminders of climate crisis, and be motivated to push for change.

The last bullet seems to be the target audience of the group. And they're the ones who will actually do anything.

[–] AA5B 2 points 1 week ago

Their only goal is attention

This is not scammy advertising where “any attention is good attention”. This is an important cause where we need to build support

They can afford to be unpopular to further the cause.

Sure, no donations, no popular support, they can just be marginalized and ignored as a bunch of extremists. Everyone cheers when the cops cart them off to jail. Yay for attention though

Those who are apathetic about the climate are still going to be apathetic, with a bit of rage

This is where they’re wrong, and where I’m especially frustrated when it’s a cause I agree with. All those middle ground or non-active people who could be wooed as supporters, will now dismiss the cause as a bunch of annoying kooks. Nobody caused change by driving away potential supporters

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What cause are they furthering though?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Inspiring people to act against climate change.

[–] Melvin_Ferd -5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They silence a lot of people fighting for climate change by making it harder for everyone to discuss this. They make it much harder every time they pull one of these stunts. Its not smart unless you're talking about the oil industry execs funding them

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

"Silence"? How?

They don't make it harder to discuss climate change. People don't just go "a small group I hate cares about climate change so now I don't care". And if they do, well, they never actually cared about the climate. They cared about looking good and were never going to help with anything.

And stop with the conspiracy that they're funded by oil executives. The organisation of the granddaughter of an oil billionaire (who is dead) funds 2% of them. Because, children and grandchildren, believe it or not, can disagree with their elders.

[–] AA5B 1 points 1 week ago

People don’t just go “a small group I hate cares about climate change so now I don’t care”.

No they don’t, but if I want to talk about the same cause to try to change people’s minds, instead I have to explain away a bunch of extremists and try to get them to take the cause seriously despite those extremists

[–] Melvin_Ferd -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's 100% not a conspiracy and you can go back to find many climate organizations have been infiltrated by agent provocateurs since the 70s. The FBI sent a guy in had a kid and pulled him out leaving an entire family. Industries have lots of leaked documents showing their support for these groups because they're so unpalatable to the average person.

These groups behavior often make it harder. It distracts from the fight and puts a giant clown hat on the whole issue. People will argue "it's not permanent damage" without realizing the point that underlies that. This is about image. Its not about actual effect. Image is valuable and these people think that damaging the image somehow is the key to action because it gets people talking. Its not the 70s anymore everyone knows. We need these groups to be more self aware and create civil action to get people on board instead of making it unpalatable. Or just stop and give room for groups or drive positive change.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

many climate organizations have been infiltrated

Ok but:

  1. you're talking about the US, JSO is UK based

  2. It is a conspiracy theory because you have no hard evidence that JSO is infiltrated and having it's strings pulled by big oil like you claim

It distracts from the fight

No I'd actually argue it brings the fight to the forefront of people's minds, specifically the people who are actually inclined to do something. Those who do nothing but complain about climate activism were never going to do anything useful and so their thoughts on the methods are frankly irrelevant since the methods work for those who actually want to act.

We need these groups to be more self aware and create civil action to get people on board instead of making it unpalatable.

They've blockaded oil terminals and vandalised terrible offenders driving climate change, and still do. It was nowhere near as effective as their publicity stunts, which get people talking. They just ended up getting whisked away by police and largely ignored by the news. Pointless.

Whether you like it or not, the sort of quiet, non-inconvenient activism you seem to be proposing has shown itself to be useless.

[–] Melvin_Ferd -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Greenpeace, OWS, ELF, Activists at Standing rock and in Briton groups like CND (look up Mark Kennedy) have all been infiltrated and lead astray. But this group is somehow different? I call bullshit especially after seeing these groups piss off more and more people every time they make the news.

This doesn't bring any of this to forefront of peoples minds. I'd argue it does the opposite of what you propose. It forces an association between the topic and people who are not appealing.

You should really evaluate what you're saying here.

Those who do nothing but complain about climate activism were never going to do anything useful and so their thoughts on the methods are frankly irrelevant since the methods work for those who actually want to act.

This issue hinges entirely on getting voters to care. Yet, many groups and even you seem to dismiss them, saying "they don't matter." In reality, voters are the most crucial factor.

It makes sense that the idea of alienating the general public from climate action might be intentionally promoted by well-funded and organized entities. These entities have the resources to influence groups, and we've seen this pattern in many movements since the beginning. Their goal is likely to disrupt and weaken the effectiveness of climate action initiatives.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This doesn't bring any of this to forefront of peoples minds.

If they didn't make headlines a lot less people would be talking about climate change at this moment.

This issue hinges entirely on getting voters to care. Yet, many groups and even you seem to dismiss them, saying "they don't matter." In reality, voters are the most crucial factor.

As I said earlier with examples for each category of people, almost everyone in this issue is not going to be influenced to change their opinion on a massive topic like climate change because of a small annoying group. Except those who'll be spurred onto direct action.

And in that quote I was referring to those who complain about any climate activism (see the comments on blocked oil refineries and painted jets YouTube videos). Not voters overall.

It makes sense that the idea of alienating the general public from climate action might be intentionally promoted by well-funded and organized entities.

This is a potential issue but as I've already said, I think what JSO is doing is quite clever for the cause and I don't think bad actors are involved. If they are, they're bad at their job.

[–] kaffiene 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

1, BS. 2, The history of change is full of people who pissed off a lot of other people. Change never happens from asking politely and being meek

[–] Melvin_Ferd 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

survivor basis on that. And really how much change do we have here? Aren't we still fighting all the same issues for decades? Maybe time to face the truth

[–] kaffiene 1 points 1 week ago

It's not surivor bias. Unsuccessful protestors weren't all killed. And no, we're not fighting all the same issues: gay rights, woman's rights, workers rights, racial equality have all made huge strides over the years and protests have led those changes. That's the truth that you need to face. Read up on the civil rights movement for a good example, or emancipation for women.

[–] Melvin_Ferd -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why not fund raise and set up a lobby group and fund politicians to pass laws. Why stand in traffic. Seems like the most ineffective backward steps

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why not fund raise and set up a lobby group and fund politicians to pass laws.

Do you think some kids are going to be able to buy the support of politicians by outbidding the oil companies?

[–] AA5B 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Do you think some kids are going to be able to buy the support of politicians by outbidding the oil companies?

Politicians care about votes, money is just an easy way to get them. No, a bunch of kids by themselves brings nothing to the table. A bunch of extremists probably never gets to the table. Do you know what’s the only thing that may outrank those corporate interests? Votes. If you bring votes to the table they don’t even have to buy, you’ll get a response

Notice what’s being discussed here. You claim this type of action gets people talking but no one here is discussing their cause nor supporting it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah because these people are making random attacks on landmarks instead of going after oil refineries and gas stations. Their strategy is confusing to the general public.

Targeting oil companies directly would force people to talk about the actual issue. "These radicals put orange dust on Stonehenge what are they trying to accomplish with that?" vs. "these radicals got an oil refinery shut down for a day, what are they trying to accomplish with that?" The former requires an abstract explanation (which isn't effective) while the latter has a very obvious answer to the point where most people won't even bother asking the question.

[–] Melvin_Ferd -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yes, why wouldn't they. What do you think TPUSA is

[–] kaffiene 1 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

By TPUSA do you mean Turning Point USA, the organization that's funded by billionaires?

[–] Melvin_Ferd 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

A single kid who won support and funding of politicians and other powerful people. A real asshole who I think dropped out of college.

I hear how the left is so much smarter by often I see the left doing foolish stuff like spray painting historical works to fight climate change or advocating to deflate tires from the general public.

All the while the right are going across the country to college campuses and bringing their band of idiots like JP and Kirk to speak directly to the youth about their issues