• woelkchen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    And if they protested people commuting into a city, a huge source of global emissions, they’d be criticized for that too.

    May, just maybe, those aren’t the only two choices. Maybe they could also protest in front of offices of politicians and actually reach the people who can change anything.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      And maybe, just maybe, the protesters should have a goal of not only getting their message out but winning people over to their side. Maybe a goal of gaining support.

      I don’t think this strategy of “annoy as many people as you can” will succeed in gaining any positive attention

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think this strategy of “annoy as many people as you can” will succeed in gaining any positive attention

        It’s literally the only strategy that has ever worked before, other than outright violence.

        After all, who gives a shit about “positive attention” for its own sake? What matters is actually effecting change, and that does not require people to like you.

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

                The Civil Rights Act was passed in large part because of it. Is your argument that the Civil Rights Act changed nothing? Because that’s silly. Or were you just not thinking, and trying to score internet points? Because that’s also silly. You’re being silly.

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

        What if you want to make a movement lose support? Could you then do this as a tactic to hurt a cause?

    • Thundernerd@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      100%. The moment you point out that this isn’t the way to go you’re instantly seen as the bad one, that you don’t want to be inconvenienced. It’s so dumb.

      • explodes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        People have done that but the publicity isn’t nearly as large as a globally televised event.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Any publicity is good publicity, huh? Here’s a data point that says “nope”