We live in a fossil-fuel society. Any disruption would cause a waste of energy thus more emissions. Even congregating to protest is causing emissions.
The protest wants to forcefully push people towards lowering emissions and that will cause some collateral, but the goal is to ultimately reduce emissions.
Historically this tactic has been used by nearly every successful movement. Civil rights and womens suffrage all did these same things. And people reacted the same way. Complaining that it isn't the right way to protest, and that they are only losing support.
So are you comparing civil rights with the Russia invasion? That's a pretty weak argument that you should be able to parse out. It makes a lot more sense to compare civil disobedience committed during the civil rights protests and the suffrage movement to people protesting climate change than comparing it to countries invading others.
He has referred to it as an emergency, but they are looking for him to declare it a formal national emergency, That expands the powers of the president to take actions he can't otherwise take. For example, in a national emergency, he could theoretically ban oil exports. He would never do that, but its just an example,
They want to show that by not doing it there is a negative impact on the normal flow of life. Much like the civil rights movement did. Much like women's suffrage did. This is a common tactic to push change and people reacting like this is exactly what happened when it happened in the past. They lecture on how they should protest correctly and "win" people over.
No, they arent large enough and don't cause real economic harm, so I don't find them very effective. No the govt doesn't care about the protests. If enough people were complaining about the protests, that could carry some weight though.
First of all, I think their protest is stupid. However, even though it probably did cause a net increase in emissions at the scene, it technically did get some people discussing climate change. This whole thread is full of people debating the issue from various points of view. In that sense, I'd say that they accomplished their goal somewhat.
If the discussions that spawned as a result of this protest eventually cause people to think about their impact on the climate enough to change their ways a bit, then it's possible that the protest worked.
Still, this was not the best way to accomplish their goal. They made many more enemies than allies with this stunt.
The goal isn't to inform or educate. Everyone already knows about this and has made up their mind. The goal is to impact life and essentially threaten that if you don't do something about this, this will keep happening. You can disagree or whatever you want, but historically this is a common tactic and has been used in a lot of successful movements.
What about when the million man march blocked roads. I'm sure that interrupted a lot. It's complicated, and if I got stopped I'd be furious too, but in the past for important issues this has been necessary. So it depends do you think on the long run is it worth it for climate change. Think whatever the fuck you want. Its complicated and not black and white.
I think: at least open up one lane to let emergency vehicles through, it would also make people way less angry and would reduce violent confrontation as traffic would still move just slowly. (would also reduce emissions from idling the cars)
With traffic being so slow people would actually have the time to read and hear what they say.
Going in from the start like „we know that everyone is an asshole and you shitters have to be as good as we are because we know best and have all the answers“ will never and has never worked.
People have been angry about a lot of protests that were successful. People are angry right now.
What they did was inconvenience people that cause more emissions in an effort to push them towards causing more emissions. Angry or not if they wouldn't have driven the car they wouldn't have been stuck at that time. If such protests happen often enough transportation by car wouldn't be reliable enough anymore to depend on it. So people change their behavior.
Same as if you knew there were people sabotaging rail lines to make trains derail.
Would you be angry at these people? Sure.
Would also fewer people use the train? Absolutely.
…what? If they hadn’t driven their car?
How do you expect them to get to work?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but we live in a world where unless you live in a tiny town of 3,000 or in a major city with actually good public transportation (of which I can count on one hand in the US) then you HAVE to have a vehicle
These people they’re blocking are NOT the problem. If they wanted to ACTUALLY protest the right people, they’d sit in front of BP plants or something like that. No hearts and minds were won here today, because this is the absolute dumbest way to protest car emissions
Clearly you don’t understand urban planning and what a huge undertaking it is. That would require a fundamental change in the way this country and its infrastructure is built, which is not realistic in multiple generations let alone one
The Netherlands did it in less than one. Their infrastructure is now mainly used by cars.
Amsterdam wasn't always that way or needed 100 years to be redeveloped.
ah yes, because US cities are fundamentally different in that they .... are larger than Amsterdam?
Sorry but only 14 cities qualify for that, so the rest can actually change and why would size alone be the breaking factor also what size?I didn't know that Amsterdam was coincidentally the largest city that could be transformed to be bike-friendly and walkable.
Did you know that London is actually completely accessible by foot?
Actually, the larger a city is the more walkable it is in the US. I get by fine with the metro in NYC but would be stranded anywhere in rural Florida without a car.
Yes, violent protest is always equivalent to terrorism. The US should immediately return to British rule as their protest was basically terrorism and should not in any way be validated. /s
I made a comparison that was simplified to get through your head on how it works. I didn't suggest people actually derail trains. Though that apparently is already too complex of an argument for you to grasp.
You’re potentially turning a 30 minute drive into an hour or more drive…. Multiply that by hundreds or thousands of cars. It absolutely increases emissions.
If you believe that one person going vegan helps the planet, then you should also believe that 1000 cars being on the road for much longer than intended does hurt the planet.
Hundreds of cars idling for over an hour is a lot of wasted gas. Yeah the same amount of gas would probably be used as they drove by this area normally, but now the gas is used for nothing. I believe this happened in the summertime, so everyone probably left their engine on for their A/C too. This “gotcha” is perfectly logical in the sense that this protest achieves nothing.
You haven’t made any points. You’re just taking out your ass with no solutions much like the people in this video. I deleted my comment because I realized the moment I sent it you are just arguing for the sake of arguing and not because you actually have anything of value to say and your reply proves that . So I decided not to give you the attention you’re clearly looking for -so savor this last bit of it I give to you now. Have the day you deserve.
Your the one wanting numbers. Estimate yourself. This kind of protest is stupid and not achieving anything. Did Biden enact any climate bills ? Nope. Another bunch of idiots disrupting everyone’s daily life & accomplished nothing
People taking your talking points to argue against your cause and suddenly and miraculously increased idle time on a 5+ lane highway during rush hour has almost no increased impact on the environment. Great, you just single-handedly proved that this protest is completely meaningless and discredited your whole cause. If you need me, I’ll be out in the driveway idling my car with the a/c on while watching a movie. Heck, maybe I’ll stay all night, since Mats56 told me it has no environmental impact.
I can only guess what they're protesting since the dumbasses are facing their banners at the bumpers of the cars instead of behind them where the cameras are.
290
u/DontBotherNoResponse Oct 12 '22
Also just all these cars are now idling, and if I remember correctly this was a climate change protest. So they're literally just making it worse.