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

39 points
*

Not paint, literally orange corn flour that’ll wash off with the first rain. Stop spreading disinformation for big oil pls. Idk why they went for this instead of classical art, but acting like this is some terrible evil crime is exactly what oil companies want you to think, they want you to root against people protesting climate change, no matter how tiny their vandalism is in the grand scheme of things

permalink
report
reply
11 points

I can root for people protesting climate change and think this was incredibly idiotic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The article says it came out of a spray can. So how am I spreading misinformation?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Not misinformation, disinformation. You read the article, yet choose to act like this is comparable to spray paint or something else that won’t immediately wash off. This is like getting indignant bc somebody threw a couple eggs at a great pyramid. It’s stupid and irrelevant to climate change, but sharing articles where the title says they threw acid instead of eggs is just fucking wrong, and serves no purpose besides discrediting climate activism

Edit actually this article says nothing about corn flour, sorry for accusing you of ignoring that. That’s super shady and shitty on the Guardian’s part, a detail that majorly changes how actually harmful this act was

Double edit you’re still acting like they threw actual paint, so nvm my apology. Stop being such a blatant oil shill

permalink
report
parent
reply

They posted the article with the headline completely unchanged. If you wanna be mad at someone, be mad at The Guardian.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

It’s stone. Stone is full of cracks. It will get into those cracks and not wash off.

Furthermore, environmentalists pissing people off in the middle of a religious ceremony does nothing to help with an environmental cause. That’s the way PETA goes about doing things. Do you think they’ve been remotely effective?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

What is it the activists wanted people to think? Did they consider their actions might lead people to turn against them instead of against the oil companies?

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

I get that the stunts will draw attention to the environmental issues the activists are protesting for, but surely not pissing off the public would be beneficial in spreading a message to them?

The uninvolved public would just remember the attempted defacings, and not care about the damage being temporary or minimal.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Yeah, I agree with the sentiment, but I feel like the methods are pointless and even might have a reverse effect. Doing this does nothing really to help the cause, imo. Any minimal publicity it gets, I feel, just invigorates the right leaning conservatives to have more fuel to hate “the left” and “liberals”. I just don’t see any benefit to these types of stunts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

This isn’t minimal publicity, minimal publicity is what they got when they directly targeted fossil fuels by blocking the supply lines.

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Are you seriously really upset at coloured cornflour being spread over some rocks?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

One hopes the powder doesn’t cause any lasting damage to a priceless piece of human cultural heritage.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

That is my worry. Even if it gets washed off by rain, it can get into cracks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Eh.

That, too, is the history of the monuments.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That doesn’t justify it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Man big oil has it easy with all these slacktivists shitting in public and calling it a protest.

permalink
report
reply
10 points
*

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

permalink
report
reply
5 points

It’s orange power which washed off with water

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

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/

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

What cause are they furthering though?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

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

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

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 249K

    Comments