this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2656 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If you ever wanted to read about fake druids vs. environmental activists, now's your chance.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Those stones will be suuuper useful to us after we died because our global ecosystem collapsed.

Maybe we should set up our own stones for explaining to future generations why we didnt do anything about climate change until it was too late.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I'm not sure how this helps though. These people can say to future generations, "well, we didn't get people to stop using fossil fuels, but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument that was made long before anyone had the idea of burning fossil fuels to make people aware of a problem they were already aware of but powerless to do anything about."

This isn't going to stop oil companies from drilling for oil.

It reminds me of a friend of mine I used to follow elsewhere on social media. Every day, she would post pictures of 'death row dogs' in nearby shelters that were going to be euthanized. There was fuck all I could do about it. I already have two dogs, from shelters. I don't have room for more and I couldn't afford more. So all it did was make me feel like shit. Then she started posting photos with "too late" messages and I stopped following her.

How does that help?

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How does that help?

We're talking about it

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

“The orange cornflour we used to create an eye-catching spectacle will soon wash away with the rain..."

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

will soon wash away with the rain..."

Just like any attention they may have grabbed due to their stunt.

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

For the record, I'm not saying I agree with their methods, but I don't think it's fair to them either that everyone is acting like they did irreparable harm to the monument.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 6 days ago)
[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Many of the recent protests about climate change have been less direct and more about stirring up controversy to force the public to actually think about their decisions.

My hat off to them as so far this style of protest has been working and has resulted in many of us pushing for better climate control.

You're right this isn't going to stop companies, but even if you disagreed with them it puts climate change in your conscious mind. Even if that simply means you'll try to make slightly more climate friendly decisions moving forwards, that's a win.

Personally I don't know if I agree with the technique, but I do feel like it has been working in terms of making people discuss this topic more.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 6 days ago)
[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Your example shows exactly what people are missing. Just because you did not have the capacity for more dogs doesnt mean that other people never got convinced to save one of those dogs. If those pictures convinced even just one person to adopt a dog, then it was worth the minor inconvienience that you had to go through.

Similarly the actual damage from this protest is slim to none (if they used the same stuff as usual that just washes away with water) and if it convinces somebody to get politically active for climate change then it was already worth it.

You thinking that you are powerless, shouldnt result in other people being forced to be powerless when they are not.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A better way to propose your question is: out of all the millions of people on Earth who hear about these activities, will literally 0 of them take any meaningful action against climate change?

The likelihood of that quite small, suggesting a non-zero value. That non-zero value is likely to be smaller than the damages of water-washable paint.

I'm not advocating for anyone here, but I think that's the calculus OP was suggesting, and it makes perfect sense to me.

If eye-rolling and annoyance produced greenhouse gases, then it might be a different story.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument

As far as I could find out, they used orange cornflour that will just wash off the next time it rains. The most amount of damage anyone could seriously bring up was that it could harm/displace the lichen on the henge.

That's not to say that I specifically condone the action, but it's a lot less bad than this article makes it sound. It's the same with the soup attack on one of van Gogh's painting, which had protective glass on it. So far all the JSO actions targeting cultural/historical things (at least the ones that made it to the big news) have been done in a way that makes them sound awful at first hearing, but intentionally did not actually damage the targeted cultural/historical thing.

I think the biases of the journalist/news outlet/etc. are somewhat exposed by which parts they focus on and which they downplay or omit entirely.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I hope you're right because this article says they used a spray can.

Also, orange dye can easily get into cracks in the rocks and stay there for a very long time. Especially if it displaces the lichens. That won't make it collapse, so maybe 'damage' is not the right word, but this is potentially long-lasting vandalism which, as far as I can see, will have no effect on the actual problem.

[–] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I hope you’re right because this article says they used a spray can.

Which brings me back to the last point in my comment.

I also hope I'm right. The two times I looked into it (right after the attack and before writing my comment) both came up with that result. Also it seems that English Heritage came out today saying there was "No visible damage".

As I said, I'm not writing to defend the action, just pointing out that the OP article is, willfully or not, omitting certain aspects that could make JSO look a little bit better.

Edit: Formatting

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Not paint, literally orange corn flour that'll wash off with the first rain. Stop spreading disinformation for big oil pls. Idk why they went for this instead of classical art, but acting like this is some terrible evil crime is exactly what oil companies want you to think, they want you to root against people protesting climate change, no matter how tiny their vandalism is in the grand scheme of things

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The article says it came out of a spray can. So how am I spreading misinformation?

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Not misinformation, disinformation. You read the article, yet choose to act like this is comparable to spray paint or something else that won't immediately wash off. This is like getting indignant bc somebody threw a couple eggs at a great pyramid. It's stupid and irrelevant to climate change, but sharing articles where the title says they threw acid instead of eggs is just fucking wrong, and serves no purpose besides discrediting climate activism

Edit actually this article says nothing about corn flour, sorry for accusing you of ignoring that. That's super shady and shitty on the Guardian's part, a detail that majorly changes how actually harmful this act was

Double edit you're still acting like they threw actual paint, so nvm my apology. Stop being such a blatant oil shill

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They posted the article with the headline completely unchanged. If you wanna be mad at someone, be mad at The Guardian.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's stone. Stone is full of cracks. It will get into those cracks and not wash off.

Furthermore, environmentalists pissing people off in the middle of a religious ceremony does nothing to help with an environmental cause. That's the way PETA goes about doing things. Do you think they've been remotely effective?

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You know what else will get into the cracks?

Rain. To wash it off.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's really not how things work. We know a lot about ancient foods specifically because they get stuck in cracks in tools and we can get them out and study them. The rain didn't get the tiny flecks of wheat out of the cracks.

[–] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

"The rain didn't get the tiny flecks of wheat out of the cracks" Yet somehow it's clean. Why are you continuing to act like this is comparable to actual paint? You're whining about something that's literally not a deal in the slightest, you really should stop making free propaganda for oil companies

slight wording edit at the start

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe if you had given me that article before you started berating me for not knowing what I was talking about, I might have been educated on the subject.

Are you really not able to talk to people without insulting them?

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The responsibility is on you to do your research before you argue about a topic.