There are alot of flagged / down-voted comments on here that express a negative view (to put it mildly) against climate activists. The reason for that I think is at least in the west, climate activists get a very bad rap because of their tactics.
Every time I hear a story about climate activists it's always: stopping traffic by gluing themselves to the road, gluing themselves other places, spraying paint/tomato sauce/etc on walls, windows, and art. Now I get that this is a small subset of the climate activism but I even then I think that climate activists need to seriously rethink their tactics.
Blocking traffic for example is in my opinion a completely counter-productive way of protesting. Rather than spreading your message, the only message you are spreading is: "I'm blocking traffic, I'm a complete a**hole" and the downvoted comments here reflect that sentiment. If you want to spread your message, you need people on come join your side, and no one is going to want to join your side if you're using these kids of tactics.
> climate activists get a very bad rap because of their tactics.
If the tactics is effevtive, we call them disruptive terrorists. If the tactic is ineffective, like organising the 30th climate change conference. we ignore them or laugh at them.
Performative activism is about showing off one's loyalty to the group, not about enacting actual change. Their actions make complete sense once this is considered.
Why hard to ignore? Is the premise that everyone is ignorant of the special knowledge that only activists have and everyone should be forced to consume? Perhaps most people already know about the subject and are either already making their own changes or simply don't care. In both cases, hard to ignore activism does nothing to advance the cause and only serves to discredit the message by making it associated with unlikable and often seemingly unhinged activists. Of course if the purpose is to impress one's friends, mission accomplished.
The counterpoint to this is, of course, the civil rights movement, which forced the nation to see segregation and mobilized national support for immediate action.
Our moral systems aren't going to line up to the point I can deliver an answer that will satisfy you. The only moral tactic is pacifistic opting-out. Most activists are as evil as the people they are fighting.
Neither of those imply a right to not be annoyed. They imply a right to walk away from the annoyance. They would, similarly, have the “right” (in whatever weird sense the word is being used, here) to craft a plan that would make that difficult. And so on.
“Rights” are a bizarre/incoherent way to look at this.
> Now I get that this is a small subset of the climate activism but I even then I think that climate activists need to seriously rethink their tactics.
All means to fight climate change will always be used, and many people will always find a strawman to justify their inaction, or worse their actions against a better future...
I don't think it's fair to put more blame on environmental activists than on the rest of people.
Even if you extend 'all means' to exterminating the entire population of rich countries (where most activism takes place), it's not going to be enough to stop climate change.
I used to be involved in the climate movement. Of course, the people who are blocking traffic and defacing art are in minority within the movement but they are the ones who are ones getting most of the attention in the press.
Just that you are mentioning them, it shows that it is more effective than the information campaigns and lobbying the rest had been doing.
The article was very short and very vague. "2k environmental activists killed in the last decade." Top comment? Spurred a debate about ONE cop shot in Georgia.
Most people on this site believe in technological solutionism as savior, therefore climate activists are being annoying over a problem that scientists are totally going to solve any day now and we won't need to adjust our lifestyles even one little bit, so they should just F off. (And I bet quite a few of the people on this site work in adtech, too, and feel entitled to people's attention - funny how that works.)
Every time I hear a story about climate activists it's always: stopping traffic by gluing themselves to the road, gluing themselves other places, spraying paint/tomato sauce/etc on walls, windows, and art. Now I get that this is a small subset of the climate activism but I even then I think that climate activists need to seriously rethink their tactics.
Blocking traffic for example is in my opinion a completely counter-productive way of protesting. Rather than spreading your message, the only message you are spreading is: "I'm blocking traffic, I'm a complete a**hole" and the downvoted comments here reflect that sentiment. If you want to spread your message, you need people on come join your side, and no one is going to want to join your side if you're using these kids of tactics.