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

You don’t have to sell me on climate change protests. I’ve attended a few myself.

I’m criticizing the delivery, not the message. The majority of people that heard that protest were those who travelled from around the world to see Stonehenge. Their plans were ruined, and they don’t care any more about climate change than they did that morning. Some may even resent the protesters.

Performative radicalism is only compelling to those already behind a cause. It’s discrediting to everyone else, who should be your target audience.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

The majority of people that heard that protest were those who travelled from around the world to see Stonehenge.

I didn’t travel to see Stonehenge and I’m hearing about it. So is everyone in this thread.

Their plans were ruined

And I see that now that the stones have been shown to be undamaged the dismissal of the protest is pivoting to “the poor people taking recreational flights have had their entire trip ruined!!!”

If people become less likely to take unnecessary flights because protestors might “ruin their trip” I would consider that an absolute win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

I’m criticizing the delivery, not the message.

I don’t care fucking one bit. It’s the same shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This argument is pointless. Neither of you is right. Arguing for or against optics is pointless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I’m criticizing the delivery, not the message.

That’s the same argument white liberals used during the civil Rights movement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

Is it? I used to bring literature to protests, now I bring QR codes. I’ve personally educated hundreds, if not thousands on initiatives over the years. That drives more change than ruining a family trip. Being compelling has been more successful than being loud in my experience.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

I’ve heard of them. I’ve never heard of you. Your experience is insufficient data to be making this grandiose of a statement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This argument is pointless. Neither of you is right. Arguing for or against optics is pointless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

I’m criticizing the delivery, not the message.The majority of people that heard that protest were those who travelled from around the world to see Stonehenge. Their plans were ruined, and they don’t care any more about climate change than they did that morning. Some may even resent the protesters.

"You know, I don’t disagree that the coloreds should have more rights, but did they really need to sit at the lunch counter all day? I couldn’t sit at the counter and it made my lunch take so much longer. Really inconvenient to everyone trying to get some food.

I just wished they’d go about it differently. They’re liable to make people even less accepting of them if they keep pulling stunts like that."

I hope you know that’s what you sound like. Like, read the first paragraph of MLK Jr’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and you’ll see your argument in the “white moderate”:

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Those people were protesting that they weren’t allowed to sit at lunch counters. These people are not protesting the color of Stonehenge.

permalink
report
parent
reply