I dig their passion, but they need to stop doing this kind of nonsense, IMO it does nothing for their cause and I would say it creates a negative narrative to the term "climate change".................A for effort and F on execution.
I wasn't born yet Don't get me wrong, protests are fine but know your audience, doing this at a sporting event isn't the right venue IMO. Now the sit in`s (if were talking about the same ones) where young black men and women would go to a segregated diner and sit and refuse to leave is absolutely the right venue, they are oppressing you and you are confronting them head on, or a sit in at the capital where the folks are who change the laws is the right avenue. The folks who go and throw red paint on paintings or buildings goes beyond protest and became a crime. Like I said, I love the passion, just not sold on how they go about it at times
I think his point is that many people in hindsight support the civil rights movement now because it's public perception stain on you today if you don't support it but during the heat of the civil rights battle, the vast amount of Americans were opposed to it. For example look at national approval earrings for MLK right before being assassinated.
I think his point is that many people in hindsight support the civil rights movement now because it's public perception stain on you today if you don't support it but during the hight of the civil rights battle, the vast majority of Americans were opposed to it. It's easy today to say civil rights activism in the 60s was a good thing today. It wasn't as easy in the he 60s.
understand the point, but I still think the difference between gluing one's hands to something as a form of "protest" and sit-ins/suffrage advocacy is a difference in kind, not degree. Gluing one's hands to a gymnasium floor is a stunt, not a protest--more akin to the PETA lettuce ladies as a form of attention-grabbing than a protest that sparks reflection. Also closer to blocking highways: the likely outcome is likely to be annoyance, if not outright condemnation. Very different than a principled protest. If you're looking for historical analogues, maybe the John Brown uprising and seizing of the Federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry would be a better comparison. Widely-condemned in both the north and the south at the time, it was defended by very few abolitionists as a needed move to further the cause of abolishing slavery. Thoreau is an example of someone who defended Brown (see e.g., "A Plea for Captain John Brown" and "The Last Days of John Brown"). Even today John Brown's actions are debated on moral grounds: Brown's is not an unambiguous legacy. But Brown no doubt set the wheels in motion for the American Civil War, which ended slavery. So in other words, "protest" is not a matter of whether a majority of the population oppose or support it. Protest is a means to an end: and it matters what form that protest takes. Eco-terror and animal liberation provide other examples of debatable activist "protest." Even the best ends-justify-the-means logic can fail to justify the forms these activities take. Therefore I'll gently disagree and restate my view: gluing one's hands to art, gym floors, or other inanimate objects in hopes of drawing attention to one's cause is a serious miscalculation. All it does in my view is invite ridicule and condemnation of both the cause and the people who fight for it. In other words it trivializes the cause (or at least it risks such trivialization). Climate change IS serious. Unserious climate stunts just make people think the whole thing is stupid.
I think he is saying your dismissing climate change as misguide is what people did to civil rights - dismissed it as misguided.
that is a 100% incorrect misreading of what I was saying if I dismissed anything, it was "misguided climate protesting"--key word, "protesting"
My bad in leaving the word protesting out. He was comparing sit-ins to climate protesting....and saying people thought sit-ins were misguided just like you are saying climate change protesting is misguided.
I disagree that anyone of significance believed sit-ins were "misguided": if anything, sit-ins worked rather rapidly as a form of protest to garner sympathy and support for the activists engaged in the sit-ins. The sit-ins are an excellent example of a protest that is anything BUT misguided. The climate glue protesters, on the other hand, are doing nothing but inviting ridicule. There's an entire literature on the topic of civil disobedience . . . this is a key distinction, routinely made. I am having difficulty believing I have to explain this. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/civil-disobedience/
Similar to the Con defense where belittling "the group" emboldens or galvanizes them, there's an entire cohort of Zoomers and young millennials wanting to seize the initiative in their own way. They're doing stupid ignorant things because they lack everything that would get everyone else to take them seriously. In the first analogy, one could mercifully blame our failures as a democratic society or institution. Pretty similar with the developmentally challenged vegans...
the SEP entry puts it succinctly at the top of the essay: civil disobedience involves a "general respect for the regime." Things that aren't legitimately civil disobedience don't express respect but instead assert a kind of "**** you" to the regime and to society. This is why riots and looting are properly NOT characterized as acts of civil disobedience. Again, the misguided act of gluing oneself to the Mona Lisa or delaying the U.S. Open or an NBA game is simply insulting to society. The quiet dignity of suffragettes and folks staging a sit-in at a southern restaurant counter stands in distinct opposition to the antics of glue-crazy hippies. There is no quiet dignity to admire and motivate and inspire to join . . . only antics that repel. on edit: forgot a very important "NOT" to the above. sorry about that, haste makes waste.
i guess they're targeting their demo with the "attention economy" that causes some tech companies to be valued 5-10x more than they're fundamentally worth. Like the redneck magats who feel constant and justifiable existential dread, these youngins think the humanity is doomed by what the experts are telling us. Also, some of these bozos in the clips look like they'd be baited to do anything with the right charismatic recruiter.
Not agreeing or disagreeing, but... It's a pretty sticky situation when the protest is, in effect, against the whole of global society and not 'the' regime or a local 'society.' I can't think of an analogy from past protests that implicates the entire global society.
Rioting isn't what people mean when they say acts of civil disobedience. The nature of civil disobedience is the act is meant to call out an unjust law by breaking that law and facing the court system. Rioting is not that. It's rioting. Protesting is protesting. What's weird about the climate change whatever you want to call them...is that there isn't any specific law they are trying to overturn as unjust. There's no coherent message as gluing yourself at a sports event doesn't mean anything. It just looks crazy. This is subjective - its misguided to you, but whatever impact it will have can't be measure yet. The very fact you guys bring it up is proof that they are at least succeeding into drawing attention to themselves and thus their overall cause. I always thought it was ironic when people post and repost from twitter mocking them - because that's exactly what they are aiming for. To me these are not acts of civil disobedience but rather publicity stuntz. They have no real direction. In a way, it does in fact demonstrate how powerless they are. They feel so powerless that they resort to these tactics as the only way to have a voice.
Context is what matters and many of these stunts have little or no relation to what is actually being protested. The sit ins at lunch counters that didn’t serve black people absolutely had to do with what was being protested. Throwing paint at the Mona Lisa or gluing yourself to the floor of Arthur Ashe stadium has little to do with climate change. I will say again a lot of this is “look at me attention” grabbing stunts and is based on a culture where people consider attention grabbing to actually be the same as political activism.
