929

submitted 5 months ago by poplargrove@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

175 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I’m not angry. I’m disappointed by performative radicalism of an important cause. It doesn’t help the message as much as it strokes the egos of those involved, and will likely be discrediting to those we need to reach.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 26 points 5 months ago

It doesn’t help the message

Really? Because I'm seeing it being talked about a lot.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Debating the method of the performance is not the same as compelling people to learn about climate change and join protests. If anything, it has the opposite effect. It’s only compelling to those already in the fold, and therefore counterproductive to the cause.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 14 points 5 months ago

It's also leading to discussions between those complaining about and those "already in the fold", facilitating the spread of information.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

It is though. We're talking about it now, but responding your disproving your own theory.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

Everyone having this particular exact discussion is already convinced, though.

[-] Instigate@aussie.zone 3 points 5 months ago

Conversations on a public platform aren’t just for those who speak; they’re also for those who listen. Many people are simply reading these exchanges without engaging in them. I think this discourse is most valuable for them, far more valuable than for someone whose opinion is so ingrained that they’re the one arguing about it.