• neonred@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    “It will go away, no harm done” is your stance? Well, there is harm done, if not only on the societies feeling of sanity and security. What was the purpose of that action? To seed shock and “ruffle some feathers”, sow disbalance under the coat of “shaking sleeping people up”.

    “No harm done”? Well, then let me waterboard you, hit you, hit your wife and children. The blue specks will go away, no harm done. Your psychological effects? They will go away, seek therapy. You’re still less affected people than the society.

    Of course this was sarcasm. But think about what stance you just took and reflect.

    • notabot@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      What was the purpose of that action? To seed shock and “ruffle some feathers”, sow disbalance under the coat of “shaking sleeping people up”.

      A goal at which it has singularly failed. There’ll be a bit of noise in the papers for a day or two, Stonehenge will be cleaned off with “No harm done” and life will move on with no useful change.

      Their stunts were effective the first time or two, but now are largely ignored or even just cause irritation.

      If they, indeed we, want to change the trajectory of human caused climate damage we need to build bridges at the community level and bring people together to force the hand of the political class. These stunts don’t do that, they just give ammunition to those who seek to prevent positive change.