You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
5 points
*

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
report
parent
reply
5 points

Can you elaborate?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

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
report
parent
reply
2 points

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
report
parent
reply
1 point

@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
report
parent
reply