900
Stone Rule (i.imgur.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
165 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Can you elaborate?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    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" .

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent