Respectfully, that’s dumb. They should file a request, schedule it on the calendar, get a permit, then quietly protest, getting noticed by as few people as possible…? The point of something like this is awareness and disruption.
And if you think that’s not needed, I’d like to remind you that we just elected a government that plans to let Big Oil and giant corporations decimate the planet for short term profit, dismantle the entire Environmental Protection Agency, and withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord. Again, there was no damage to the protected Constitution…
Maybe there’s a third option besides “do something ineffectual that most people will find annoying, offensive, and unrelated to climate change” and “completely resign ourselves to a climate disaster” that we can try?
It’s a dire situation and progress isn’t nearly fast enough, but progress is getting made. The answer, as ever, isn’t satisfying because it’s boring and difficult: continue to organize and apply pressure to those in power to take action, and raise awareness by pointing to how it affects people in their own lives. This stunt does neither of those things, and if anything, makes our side look whiny and out of touch.
I did not. You said they should protest something “related to climate change”. And after they’ve reached those people? They’re then not allowed to protest anymore while the planet burns? Or does it have to be “themed”? I’m simply saying protests are about rejecting rules and laws to get a point across. Even if you didn’t agree with them, you heard about it, and we’re talking about it…
Well yeah, that’s just childish.
I mean, it’s behind glass, right? No harm, no foul…?
They could have done it to something that has a connection to climate change. But apparently these people just want to make fools out of themselves.
Respectfully, that’s dumb. They should file a request, schedule it on the calendar, get a permit, then quietly protest, getting noticed by as few people as possible…? The point of something like this is awareness and disruption.
And if you think that’s not needed, I’d like to remind you that we just elected a government that plans to let Big Oil and giant corporations decimate the planet for short term profit, dismantle the entire Environmental Protection Agency, and withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord. Again, there was no damage to the protected Constitution…
Maybe there’s a third option besides “do something ineffectual that most people will find annoying, offensive, and unrelated to climate change” and “completely resign ourselves to a climate disaster” that we can try?
I’m all ears. This shit’s not working, the bad guys are winning, collecting their profits, while the world we all live in is being destroyed…
It’s a dire situation and progress isn’t nearly fast enough, but progress is getting made. The answer, as ever, isn’t satisfying because it’s boring and difficult: continue to organize and apply pressure to those in power to take action, and raise awareness by pointing to how it affects people in their own lives. This stunt does neither of those things, and if anything, makes our side look whiny and out of touch.
You either replied to the wrong comment, or completely made up what you think you read.
I did not. You said they should protest something “related to climate change”. And after they’ve reached those people? They’re then not allowed to protest anymore while the planet burns? Or does it have to be “themed”? I’m simply saying protests are about rejecting rules and laws to get a point across. Even if you didn’t agree with them, you heard about it, and we’re talking about it…
Correct, they are no longer allowed until they turn around and count to ten.
Give it a go, plenty of glass, plenty of paint.
Climate saved.
Yeah, the adult thing to do is destruction of property that actually contributes to the problem.