I think the judgment that these protests have no relationship to the issue is subjective. Even poorly executed protests are usually done for a reason and relate somehow to the issue, even if the connection seems obscure. For example, the self-immolation of the burning monk in 1963 was a vivid protest against discriminatory Buddhist laws in South Vietnam. His "look at me suffering" approach is not so different from "look at me glued here" tactics today, in the sense that both are trying to draw attention to a cause. The burning monk absolutely captured huge attention at the time. Self-immolation has been done since then but fails to garner anywhere near the same level of attention. Partly this is because society has seen it before and doesn't care as much anymore. Thus, to grab attention, protesters today feel they have to do increasingly novel or shocking things. If that guy had glued his foot in a way that required amputation, would it have changed anything? My point is that I don't completely agree these attention-grabbing protests are unrelated to political activism. I think they are a form of activism, but whether they are effective or not depends on the kind of attention they receive, if any.
The burning monk protest was done in Vietnam protesting specifically a Vietnamese policy. How does gluing yourself to the floor of Arthur Ashe stadium address climate change? Do you think someone seeing that are going to feel shamed so they drive less and start campaigning for candidates who support policies to address climate change? Without looking it up Do you even know what the people who glued themselves to the Floor of the Target Center during thr T-wolves playoff games were even protesting?
You make a valid point about the venue for the burning monk protest being fitting for the specific issue being protested against the Vietnamese government. Climate change is a global issue that requires action from the whole world, not just any single government. Therefore, a protest bringing attention to climate inaction could rightly take place anywhere, not just directed at a particular party. I made this point before in a reply to OS. In this case, the group of protesters said they 'believe the US Open has sponsorship deals with corporations whose policies are contributing to global warming.' I was speaking more to the attention brought by this type of protest, not its effectiveness. Gaining public attention is part of political activism, though of course it needs much more clarity in order to enact change. I would agree there is no clear call to action here and thus to me, it's ineffective. But from the standpoint of gaining attention, it has been effective. That is to me a part of political activism. I did need more context on both the burning monk's protest and this specific climate protest to understand their intent and potential impact. AP: Climate protester glues feet to floor at US Open, interrupts Coco Gauff’s semifinal win over Muchova https://apnews.com/article/us-open-...auff-muchova-00a82f465076adea36b098aa6ca08a0d “I always speak about preaching about what you feel and what you believe in. It was done in a peaceful way, so I can’t get too mad at it. Obviously I don’t want it to happen when I’m winning up 6-4, 1-0, and I wanted the momentum to keep going,” said Gauff, a 19-year-old from Florida. “But hey, if that’s what they felt they needed to do to get their voices heard, I can’t really get upset at it.” A group called Extinction Rebellion said it was responsible for the protest. One of the protesters, who identified himself only as Ian, told The Associated Press the group believes the U.S. Open has sponsorship deals with corporations whose policies are contributing to global warming. “We are not trying to harm the athletes in any way. We have nothing against the sport,” he said. “But we are really trying to draw attention to an issue here that there will be no tennis left for anybody in the world to enjoy.” It is the latest in a recent series of protests at sporting events — and tennis, in particular — related to the use of fossil fuels. “Throughout history, moments like this are definitely defining moments. I believe, you know, in climate change. I don’t really know exactly what ... they were protesting. I know it was about the environment. I 100% believe in that. I think there are things we can do better,” Gauff said at her post-match news conference. At Wimbledon in July, two matches were interrupted when environmental activists jumped out of the stands at Court 18 and scattered orange confetti on the grass. At a U.S. Open tune-up tournament in Washington last month, about a dozen people were asked to leave the site after chanting and displaying signs protesting the use of fossil fuels.
lol Apple unwittingly announces its plan to achieve world destruction at 3:40 “Our aim is to permanently remove carbon from the atmosphere”
Except that saying that because climate change is happening everywhere so any protest that grabs attention is relevant actually makes it less relevant. I could go around punching people in the nuts in Hong Kong and claim it’s a “Climate Change protest” because people are causing climate change and Hong Kong has a lot of people. That’s what I mean though. The attention grabbing becomes more the point than what the protests is about. Its giving a veneer to what would otherwise be dumb stunts in TiK ToK.
You made the point that the location of a protest matters in terms of relevance to the issue being protested. My statement is climate change is a global problem, so protests anywhere are relevant. So, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'less relevant'. I'm guessing you are talking about effectiveness? I don't think that 'punching someone' example is relevant because it involves violence, which was not the case here. As I have stated before, I'm not arguing about effectiveness. I'm simply saying it's a valid part of political activism. I find myself not very good at understanding today's youth, and this issue is one that will squarely impact that generation. So while I personally think that protest is not effective, I frankly think I have plenty of blind spots here and so I'm a bit leery of judging how it should be protested or how effective those protests are.
There is a saying “if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority”. Yes Climate Change is global so anything that grabs attention anywhere can be called a climate change protest completely waters down the context of a protests against climate change. It would be like me saying that chaining yourself to the gates of an oil refinery has as much relevance to climate change as chaining yourself to the gates of the MOMA. The violence would certainly grab a lot of attention. Under the reasoning that attention equals awareness perhaps then someone running down Nathan Road in Hong Kong punching people in the nuts while yelling “Stop Climate Change!” Should be very effective. Leaving aside the violence then what if I just decided to eat 100 raw oysters in 30 minutes streamed live on YouTube? Under the reasoning above that is as valid a protest as gluing myself to Arthur Ashe stadium because oysters sticks are being diminished by climate change. I think it’s not just a problem with todays youth but with culture in general that attention = awareness. That the louder and more outrageous something is means it’s something that more attention should be paid too. It infects across our politics from from disrupting a T-wolves playoff game to electing a president.
Yes, context is important. I'll move beyond the 'physical playing field' if you will and on to the context. You are making the point that the protest should be directed at something that actually contributes to global warming. That's a valid point. The protester said "The U.S. Open has sponsorship deals with corporations whose policies are contributing to global warming." Attention is just one aspect, an important one, of protest. I think there is clear evidence that violence does not garner support but just the opposite. And as stated, this protest was peaceful. I'm not understanding the oysters example. There are probably already contests of eating raw oysters quickly, so that won't gather much of any attention. Yeah, I'm from a different generation. I would say though that attention is required for awareness Which goes back to my first point - attention is an important part of political activism. Whether it leads to awareness or not afterward is also about the effectiveness of the protest, which I have already stated I think I have a bit of a blind spot to judge. (perhaps we should have a poll on what the youth think )
Godless?? Hyperbole much...............these kids have a great passion for their cause, do I agree, No, I don't but they have the right to protest. You have so much hate for anyone that you dont agree with. What a sad little man to have so much hate in your life, you are the literal "get off my lawn" dude
They have passion. I disagree with them defacing something (for someone else to clean up) to make a point, but they were successful in getting the media (or some rando xitter) to promote their cause even if it was in a negative light. It's wrong-headed, but everything in the attention economy is wrong-headed. Algos (previously media editors) regurgitate polarizing feeds with predictable results/trends. Nuance and "right/responsible" methods of advocacy are ignored/unpromoted because of its lack of novelty or outrage. Like if all the kiddos started cleaning up our trashed up beaches and were even given a platform to how those beaches at risk from Climate Change, how many fucks likes given would that garner?
The Government's Misdeed: Hiring the Untrained to Tackle the Most Challenging Issue in Human History. This is exactly why the GOP is right to shut down the government in the coming weeks. Biden is unveiling the Climate Corps, a jobs program to address climate change : NPR The White House on Wednesday unveiled a new climate jobs training program that it says could put 20,000 people to work in its first year on projects like restoring land, improving communities' resilience to natural disasters and deploying clean energy. The American Climate Corps is modeled after a program that put millions to work during the Great Depression. President Biden's climate policy adviser Ali Zaidi told reporters that the program has broader goals beyond addressing the climate crisis. "We're opening up pathways to good-paying careers, lifetimes of being involved in the work of making our communities more fair, more sustainable, more resilient," Zaidi said. The program will pay participants, and most positions will not require previous experience. The administration is also proposing new regulations aimed at making it easier for participants to enter the federal public service after the program. The announcement has been in the works for some time Biden first called for the government to find a way to establish a "civilian climate corps" in an executive order during his first week in office. The president said that he hoped the corps would "mobilize the next generation of conservation and resilience workers and maximize the creation of accessible training opportunities and good jobs." The idea of a climate corps began with progressive environmental activist groups, including the youth-led Sunrise Movement. "We need millions of people, especially young people, employed to do the essential work of averting climate catastrophe and building a fair and equitable new economy," said Varshini Prakash, the group's executive director, who has advised the White House on climate issues. "I am thrilled to say that the White House has been responsive to our generation's demand for a Climate Corps and that President Biden acknowledges that this is just the beginning of building the climate workforce of the future," Prakash told reporters. Biden has been criticized by young climate activists When he took office, Biden named tackling climate change as one of his top four priorities, and announced a goal of slashing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to half of 2005 levels by the end of the decade. His 2022 Inflation Reduction Act — some $369 billion in climate incentives and spending — is expected to get the country close to that goal. But Biden has faced intense criticism from some factions of the environmental movement, particularly after he approved a large-scale drilling project known as Willow in northern Alaska. That decision directly contradicted a campaign pledge to bar all new drilling on federal lands, and polling showed a decline in his approval ratings on climate. Since then, Biden been barred federal drilling on millions of acres of federal property, a measure aimed at wooing back the young, climate-conscious voters who played an important role in his electoral coalition. The Climate Corps is more modest than some had hoped Democratic lawmakers including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., had pushed for more funding for the climate corps program, but that did not transpire, meaning the program is likely to be smaller in scope than early proposals. It's also much smaller than its predecessor: the Civilian Conservation Corps, a New Deal-era program that ran for 10 years and employed millions restoring public lands and building infrastructure for the country's national parks. There is another key difference, too. While the Conservation Corps primarily employed young, white men, the White House says that the American Climate Corps is designed to attract participants from disadvantaged communities disproportionately impacted by the changing climate.
Passion is a good thing and shouldn’t be discouraged. It’s how that passion is used. When it’s used for destructive or just attention grabbing frankly it’s largely wasted but that passion can be channeled into doing more. For example I’ve been in many disaster sites and there is a lot of passion especially among young people to help with things like that. Also in Minneapolis every night after there was rioting and looting thousands of people many who were young turned out to help clean up. The problem is that more attention and media coverage was paid to a young man throwing a brick through a window than one with a broom sweeping up broken glass.
