Gregory's Server@davidho I think that's a false dichotomy. I think we can make better activist choices that target bad actors with clear messages. Blocking ambulances and people trying to do school pickups or get to parole meetings or come home after working shit jobs where they're dehumanized all day doesn't build solidarity. Especially with helicopters for the rich.
|
4 comments
@pmeyfroidt @JacquelynGill @davidho At this point it's either blocking roads or doing a terrorism. Activists have tried literally everything else. The reason you haven't heard of them doing whatever you think would be less inconvenient to the general public is that nobody cared when they did it. @alan @pmeyfroidt @JacquelynGill @davidho so when this approach also does not work (and why would it), will terrorism become acceptable? The problem is by no means that people don't know about the climate crisis or the protests (FFF anyone?). The problem is that they don't care enough to vote for politicians that care enough. Alienating them further brings the risk of even more short-sighted decisions. |
@JacquelynGill @davidho
I agree with the point that targeting the weak actors is a bad strategy but i didn't read the message as a false dichotomy. I read it as something like "to those regular people who are blocked by climate activists, realize that these activists may be sometimes misguided in their actions, but they are doing that, however inadequately, because they want to avoid great harm". Should be a message that actually goals are aligned.