this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
928 points (99.9% liked)

196

16730 readers
1897 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I’m not fighting protesters, I am one. I’m suggesting these protesters do a better job of it.

Radicalism is always discredited by everyone on the outside of a cause, and those are the people you need to reach.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Radicalism is mostly supported by those who already support a cause. People who are unaware of a cause, or not in support will typically dismiss the message of a radical performance and focus on rejecting the behavior. The message gets lost, and the only people that cheer are already on your side.

No one is unaware of climate change as a topic. The rate, severity, and urgency of climate change are what gets consistently misrepresented and suppressed. Those are the points that need to be communicated far and wide, and I don’t see how painting Stonehenge compels anyone to learn more about it or join future protests.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I see what you mean. I agree people need much more tangible details about how climate change is already effecting them and will affect us in the future. As well as the sheer out of proportion footprint of for profit industry.

But even if you where to communicate the details, people would still need to care to listen. The most effective path is probably a bit of both, radical action to turn heads but also have those actions carrying a more directly explicit message other then "acknowledge us" .

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The right approach for more extreme activism should at least be directly related to the awareness. Another user pointed out the jet painting. It’s a great example. Many people are not aware of the massive carbon emissions from private jet owners. It made global headlines, drove awareness of a specific part of the problem, and even briefly impacted emissions by grounding jets.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jun/20/activists-spray-planes-with-paint-at-uk-airfield-where-taylor-swift-jet-landed

Stonehenge has nothing to do with climate change. The visitors that that day may even be soured on the topic due to the protest’s impact on their plans. It accomplished nothing but momentary infamy, and is ultimately discrediting to the cause.

I attend more organized protests. I always bring materials for education. It’s always a good idea to supply literature or QR codes to resources to help inform interested passers-by.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 months ago

Maybe it drove headlines where you are but for me its a first i hear of it.

Yet everyone is talking about Stonehenge.

100% agree though activism needs more clear messaging.

[–] Five@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 months ago

@disguy_ovahea has no idea what he's talking about. He apparently attended a couple of protests and thinks he's now an expert on social change.

A horse race has about as much to do with women's right to vote as Stonehenge does with climate change, but that didn't stop Emily Davison's direct action at the 1913 Epsom Derby from being a watershed moment in the struggle for women's suffrage.