you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 67 points 1 year ago (38 children)

As you add more and more issues to the protests, the set of people that have the same opinion on every single issue gets smaller and smaller, until your movement falls apart.

In Germany around the same time, climate protests started to take stances on immigration and cultural approbation and also fell apart as a result.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 84 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Brother I don't even know how you plan to sit here and pretend like those are separate issues. You can't separate capitalism and climate change. You simply cannot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 74 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That's not the point they're making.

    As you add more issues, then the Venn diagram of overlap of all the issues gets smaller and smaller. It doesn't matter if you think this is an obvious objective truth. What matters is what other people think, because you won't have much of a "movement" without other people who agree and join you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    We can also do united fronts. We don't all have to agree on everything to work on aset of issues

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Exactly, and you literally cannot work on that issue if you don't understand that capitalism climate change are linked. Any attempt to address climate change without addressing the problems of capitalism will always fail because capitalism is what is allowed it to get to this point and to continue to become worse. There's literally not one thing you could do to address climate change that will not be undermined by the capitalist class. Anyone paying attention should know that right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It's linked but Communism can also be unsustainable. Climate change is known since 1970 or such.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea

    There are only a few big billionaires. They could agree on protecting nature. I believe that they have chosen to continue for the northern shipping routes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Educate the working class, instead of making them ignorant on purpose so they won't revolt, so when they seize the means of production they think greener then?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can try that.

    Ironically you could also try protecting nature by becoming a leading Capitalist and owning all means of production yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But to become a leading capitalist you must exploit hundreds of thousands of people.

    This process strips you of most of your humanity and empathy, thus you will likely no longer care about "protecting nature".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago

    For the influence to change the world, it will be millions or billions. You also have to exploit some nature to protect the rest.

    This is a Stalin level of monstocity, or beyond.

    Is it a price worth paying? Because even if it is something else, like a Communist approach, the efforts will be the same. E.g. if China ends up protecting nature globally, they have paid that price.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Most people in the US right now read at a 6th grade level.

    Don't waste time trying to bring them up; change your message to something they understand.

    "Tax the rich! No more billionaires!"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    In France the green party has always been on the left. They always talk about Muslims, the burka, feminism, or Palestine nowadays. That's why voters are very confused.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    Our greens too. And they also had to force closing nuclear plants, but when the closing date came closer and people started to ask where their power would come from, the greens said they'd built natural gas plants. Nobody took them seriously after that, and the decision of closing of nuclear plants was reversed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    You have to take a step back and look at how politics actually works.

    No one can do anything unless they get elected; and no one can take a strong stand on every issue and win an election.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    This is what happened to Occupy Wall Street in the US, and I'm convinced it was intentional movement busting.

    Probably the same thing with the climate protests in Germany.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Germany elected a more left leaning government and they actually did pass some good climate legislation. That was aided by Putin cutting of fossil fuels to Germany as well, but the protests and public mood were certainly on the site of climate action. However the protests were having problems of bringing the same numbers on the street as before covid and the fossil fuel industry spend on a lot on busting the protests.

    Then the far right really gained strength in Germany and that became the much more pressing issue, rather then climate change.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I think the occupy movement fell apart partly due to the fact that it never really coalesced around any sort of leadership group or figurehead. The list issues kept getting longer, the list of desired changes kept getting ever more diverse and contradictory, and there was very rarely anyone who could articulately explain to the general public what the movement was about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    @IrateAnteater @wizardbeard I think it was crushed by police repression and contrary to what you believe, I believe not having figure heads was the main strength of the movement

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Not having any sort of centralized leadership is a double edged sword. Your movement gains resistance to authorities being able to knock out the movement with a couple arrests, but your movement becomes much more prone to fizzling out of you can't somehow maintain focus, which is what happened to the Occupy movement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    @IrateAnteater what are some good examples of somewhat successful movements with leaders?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, occam's razor, it wasn't a sinister conspiracy to 'bust the movement', what you describe is something that can and has happened, many times, to causes, diluting them into a nebulous, impotent murk.

    It's not that deep.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don’t know about occupy Wall Street but the climate protest in Germany suffer most from radicalization. Ordinary people want to peacefully protest climate change, not march against capitalism, barricade themselves in tree houses or glue themselves to roads in rushhour traffic. The movement was taken over by attention seeking radical far left ideologues and that’s kind of a turn off for most people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    @lemmylommy @wizardbeard all your examples are of peaceful protest. Is saving the climate important or is it not? If yes, then we need to become more radicalized

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    New York Mayor Ed Koch put it best.

    "If you agree with me 51% of the time, vote for me. If you agree with me 100% of the time, see a psychiatrist."

    You don't have to like the candidate to vote for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Its a big difference voting for someone or actually getting out protesting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I look at it this way. The GOP doesn't do a lot of rallies and marches, yet they have a lot of power.

    They organize their ground game and get voters to the polls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Maybe we should start pestering politicians with asking when they'll invest billions in climate adaption to protect from flooding and drought. Except for USA where they'll pretend nothing is happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    "Pestering" is nothing.

    Find the ones who are doing something and give them full support.

    You have finite resources. Don't waste time annoying people who are opposed, work full time for their enemies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    In Germany around the same time, climate protests started to take stances on immigration and cultural approbation and also fell apart as a result.

    Fell apart according to who? The media? This is really what the post is trying to discuss. Why did Greta Thunberg media coverage drop once she started get involved in other protests too?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago*

    The movement is stronger than ever. The coverage has disappeared, but there are more and more people willing to seek out every right answer and give up every privilege.

    Centrists and right-wingers keep pretending that solidarity and radicalism makes movements weak, when it has always made them stronger. The moment Labor parties abandoned radicalism and chose the Third Way, their voter share dropped off a cliff. The moment movements abandon their most radical left-wing contributors to appeal to the lowest common denominator they collapse from in-fighting and the hardest workers moving off.

    There is no Schelling point for less-than-complete justice. Nations, religions, ethnicities, even capital is just one of countless different ways to slice the pie and pretend that the hurt you suffer is more urgent and in-scope than someone else's. If you morally accept rallying to one subgroup, then you have no defense against others you depend on from rallying to another subgroup and coming into opposition with you. There is no way around it:

    None of us are free until all of us are free.

  • source
  • parent