160
submitted 4 months ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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 32 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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?

[-] Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 4 months ago

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 15 points 4 months ago

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 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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 7 points 4 months ago

To play devil's advocate against the devil's advocate, I'm not sure "Stonehenge covered with orange corn starch by Just Stop Oil activists" would have communicated the kind of emergency these activists are hoping to convey, so they're clearly counting on the headline grabbing people's attention and triggering their outrage meter. In that way, the journalist might even think they're helping the JSO group.

[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

I agree, I think they've been remarkably responsible about avoiding lasting damage. What upsets me is how they're fueling the far-right rage machine with more propaganda ammunition at a time when we are already fighting a fierce and undecided battle to live in a world that isn't run by exclusionary ideological nationalistic idiots.

It's like they cannot understand that some people don't want the world saved, and agree with Hitler when he wrote about the tears of war being the bread of future generations. A sentiment that basically says suffering=good. So, more suffering=better. Will climate change cause suffering? Well, guess what then.

[-] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

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.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

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.

I don't know that I believe that is because of these protests and not just seeing what's happening to the world. I really do not see pissing people off by painting Stonehenge, especially when it's during a religious festival, helping this cause.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

If a dog urinates into a river which then floods, would you say the dog's urination caused the flood?

My wife works in environmental advocacy, and I can tell you without a shred of doubt that people's opinions are changing on climate change for a lot of different reasons. This ridiculous nonsense isn't one of them.

[-] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 1 points 4 months ago

How does that help?

We're talking about it

[-] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Note how we are talking about how large of douchebags the activists are and just how much they damaged a cultural heritage site.

Fuck these people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

But we're not talking about it. We're not talking about political action, or technological solutions, or mitigation programs, or investments in adaptation, or natural resource management, or harm reduction, or food distribution, or drought management.

No, we're talking about a bunch of first world children who decided to paint a bunch of ten-thousand year old rocks for attention.

[-] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 1 points 4 months ago

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

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

will soon wash away with the rain..."

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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Which does exactly what? Is it at all likely that anyone actually able to do anything about this was unaware of the climate change disaster we're facing and this will change their mind?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)
[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Here in the US we have one of the two main political factions regularly threatening terrorism, execution and even war.

When people are already arguing to take you out behind the chemical shed and shoot you, it's a little out of touch to think they give two shits about your future health in a changing climate. Or our planet, they probably think they can get to Mars with Elon or something, or god will rapture them, or whatever they think, I don't know.

You think people should care about future generations? They probably should, but we have parents that don't give two shits about their own kids, much less anyone else's.

this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
160 points (86.4% liked)

World News

39001 readers
1058 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