The climate activist blocked a port handling fossil fuels with a group of young activists in June.

      • Anomander@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think it’s worth addressing that “the right people” are very often going out of their way to be absolutely unreachable by the average joe and are completely impossible for mere poors to meaningfully bother directly. Protest will always inconvenience average people first, because the little people are always affected more than the rich in any action, especially any that would manage to rattle the powerful in any way.

        The powerful have managed to structure society and laws alike to make effectively all actions that would target them directly and spare the average joe from any collateral overspill either impractical - or significantly more illegal than protest actions that cast a broader net. The idea from the powerful is to ensure that protest must affect other citizens in order to reach them, and can’t just target them directly. Targeting them, alone, is harassment, or trespass on private property, or … etc.

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yep. Protesting is just marketing. It is very effective when done well and backfires when done poorly. If you study the market and target audience properly, they’ll listen and join the cause.

    • fishos@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Protests actually weren’t MLKs strongest tool, and he himself admits it. Getting arrested for doing something and then challenging it in court now that you have standing was his biggest tool. Most of the protests were just a means to get arrested. It’s revisionist history that says it was the protests specifically that worked because it’s better to emphasize the tactics that didnt work than to point out what actually did and risk a reoccurrence.

  • guyman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If your enemies are mad at you, you’re doing something right.

    • sab@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s Sweden. They’re going to fine her while telling her that they’re on her side but “rules are rules”, and meanwhile keep on consuming exactly like before without having reflected for a second on anything at all.

  • Sjatar@sjatar.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s not forget the real villains: “Cutting oil and gas production would be “dangerous and irresponsible”, the head of energy company Shell told BBC News.”

  • AlgonquinHawk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Go her. She’s doing very inspirational actions. Hopefully the courts see that.

  • Xariphon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Police exist to protect capital from even the most basic inconvenience.

    ACAB.

    Greta is a true treasure and I’m always happy to see her in the news.

      • ohle@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Climate change is the biggest thread to food production. Food and water scarcity will be (and to some extend already are) among the very first noticable catastrophic effects of climate change.

      • guyman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Climate change has the real possibility of affecting rich people.

        Poor people having stable access to food would negatively affect the wealthy. Who else would, say, desperately mine our cobalt?