• Erk@cdda.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s amazing how “righteous fury” people seem to get over folks protesting sporting events because the fucking planet is on fire.

        “Oh but couldn’t they be more calm and quiet about it, I want to watch the race!”

    • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      With participants who likely flew themselves their bikes in from all around the world for a pointless competition. I wouldn’t compare an international bike race to a person who rides their bike to work to help the environment.

      • Aux@lemmy.worldBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Sporting events are the best way to reach hundreds of millions of people to deliver the message. Athlete flights are a tiny price to pay for it. And protesters literally fucked it up. Because they are dumbfuck attention whores and nothing else.

        • Aurix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Tour de France sends the message performance is everything, and if you don’t perform, destroy your body with drugs. It is inherently toxic.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    My guess is that those “protesters” are paid and organized by some oil industry people (maybe without the activists glued to the floor knowing about this), just to give real climate activists a bad image. I’ve talked to a real climate activist recently, and she was furious about those “gullible idiots”.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s a little funny how someone believing an actual literal conspiracy theory would call others gullible idiots.

      • Noughmad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Many conspiracies are true. Probably not the ones about aliens or lizard people, but certainly the ones about oil companies (and oil countries) lying and spreading propaganda.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          There are plenty of examples of dumb environmental protests too, though. I’m not saying it’s impossible for these to be false flag impostors but to go all the way to the extreme of calling people gullible idiots for not seeing that they are hired impostors… that’s just extreme. It smacks of many conservative fantasies: gun violence victims are just hired actors, blah blah blah. Thinking that people who ruin your narrative are all hired fakes is a sign of delusion.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          No, saying that dumbass environmental protestors who are against bicycles must be hired by oil companies to give environmentalism a bad name. That’s a straight up theory that there is a conspiracy by oil companies to hire actors and ruin environmentalism.

          • glue_snorter@lemmy.sdfeu.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yes it is a theory about a conspiracy. However, it’s not a “conspiracy theory”.

            A “conspiracy theory” is, by definition, lunatic - e.g. chemtrails, fake moon landing, vaccine microchips

            A plausible theory about a conspiracy is not a “conspiracy theory” - e.g. Epstein didn’t kill himself, environmentalists protesting a cycling event are a false flag op. These may be wrong; they may be ardently believed without sufficient evidence; but they are reasonable explanations for the given facts.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              I consider suspect any theory that says “the people who disagree with my narrative must be hired actors planted to make me look bad.”

              I realize false flag operations have occurred but it is just too easy to go around thinking that inconvenient people must be actors. Let alone to call anyone who DOESNT believe this a gullible idiot.

              “Never ascribe to malfeasance what can be ascribed to stupidity” seems to apply here. Have you ever been on a college campus? There are plenty of really dumb protestors in this world. Far more than there are false flag actors.

  • Thundernerd@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I find this so silly. I feel that all this does is make people mad instead of getting them aware and informed on what they’re protesting about.

    • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      So you’re advocating for people being so selfish that the death of a livable environment is secondary to being fully comfortable today?

      • Thundernerd@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yes that is exactly what I’m saying. Not.

        I want it to be brought to people’s attention, I want countries to take action. All I hear around me is that people who do this are seen as loonies, as idiots who don’t have anything better to do, which paints a bad picture for the cause they’re trying to bring attention to.

          • Thundernerd@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Stop alienating people. You’re most definitely not helping the cause either.

            I also never said I think it is crazy. I find the way they’re going about it strange, sure, but if I have to choose between nothing happening or this then I’ll choose for this.

              • Thundernerd@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 years ago

                I indeed did not think that that is alienating. It might be because English is not my native tongue but thought the word silly didn’t have any negative connotations. If that is the case then my apologies for that. Do you have any suggestions which word I should’ve used? I could’ve gone for ‘strange’ or ‘weird’, but those are negative to me in this context.

                I do wonder why you’re coming up against me with such a negative attitude. The way you’re writing your comments are full of blame already, even though you don’t know my stance. Just because I think the way protests like these go about it isn’t the best doesn’t mean I am the devil and I support oil companies and whatnot, that’s such a leap to make.

                Especially your comment “Oil companies love that you think any noticeable protest is crazy.” is funny to me, because from my perspective YOUR comments are what oil companies love, you make me not want to associate with this subject at all.

  • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I don’t know the ideologies of the protestors, but I do agree with protesting against “big cycling”. Cycling around on a trusty steel bike which you can repair yourself is environmentally friendly. Buying a new carbon fiber bike every few years because it is 2% more aero than the last is not. Instead of standardized parts, the cycling industry wants you to buy cheap ones that break fast, and can only be replaced with their specific parts. They sell this to you by including some upgrades in chains, cassettes etc. The cycling industry is the same as any other industry, it exists to make profits. Truly sustainable things do not come from making profits.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’ve commuted to work by bicycle maybe 2 decades out of my career of almost 3 decades, NEVER with any bicyle worth more than 200 EUR (during my time in The Netherlands I always got second hand bicycles … well, more likely 4th or 5h hand) and you clearly have no fucking clue what you’re talking about.

      You’re talking about, maybe, the consumer high-end “recreative” cycling, the kind that’s sold to fad-following consumers who will at most pull out the bicycle on a weekend day, put on a “Tour de France” disguise (complete with “sponsor” sticks) and go cycle to be seen cycling.

      In countries were people actually cycle for utility purposes those are a tiny fraction of people and the “cycling industry” is something else altogether than what you describe. Normal people use normal bicycles which are not too expensive, especially because you really don’t want to park a 1000+ EUR on the street, not if you want to come back and still find all of it there.

      Further, even at the high-end, the actual pros know how to fix their own bicycles and know the value of standardized components: it’s really only the “two-wheel fashionistas” that would go for overpriced bicycles with non-standard elements.

      Going after cycling because of a few idiots (and there are idiots in every human endeavour) and calling it pro-Ecology is the pinnacle of stupidity and doing the work of the enemy.

      • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I am indeed talking about consumer high-end cycling, and I see it poisoning peoples minds in my city with their marketing that says to be eco-friendly and cycle to work you have to buy a brand new bike for £1000. I am arguing about the case in my city and the direction I don’t want to see cycling in general take. I agree with you that in many places, cycling is much better, the Netherlands is a great example. I am not going after cycling as a whole, just the rich directors of Shimano, SRAM, Trek, Specialized, etc. that have greenwashed expensive high-end cycling and make people believe that they need the latest stuff. I am not saying that the industry is already in a bad place, just that it could head that way.

      • bustrpoindextr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        You clearly didn’t read what they wrote, and then went on a tirade about it.

        Nothing you said really applies as a retort to the other user’s comment.

          • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I’m not arguing against a strawman, I’m arguing against an extreme case. In the city where I live, people buying loads of fancy new expensive bikes to seem “eco-friendly” is large. The number of high-end bike shops is large. Repair costs are extreme; £60 for a medium job. This is of course, a predominantly white, affluent city. I regularly see new gravel and commuter bikes (the latest trend) manufactured by the likes of Specialized, Trek, Canyon. These cost in the region of £1000 ± 200. I agree that there is not mass migration away from standard parts yet, but I am worried that that is the direction the cycling industry wants to take. There is already an explosion of different cassette standards, meaning you need unique tools to change many of the new cassettes. Disk brakes add complexity and expense, and your average commuter bike arguably does not need disk brakes, they are just a shiny addition to make it more marketable. My argument is against the increase of these expensive bikes, fancy parts and brands that produce them, as it just pushes people away from cycling and the ecological and health benefits it can bring.

    • Aux@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Have you ever cycled in your life? Because that’s not how it works.

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Why do you think 13 gear cassettes are a thing? The chain has to be thinner and everything is much more precise. Add to that mechanical load and it is much worse for every casual rider in reliability than the older 2x9, 3x9 systems.

        • Aux@lemmy.worldBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          First of all 2x and 3x systems are NOT reliable at all and must die. Second 1x10 systems are cheap AF and will last you a very long time. Especially modern ones made to sustain ebikes. They will outlast any 2x and 3x shit and work much much better in all and every scenario.

        • wigit@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          But you can still buy all the older systems. It’s not like they stopped producing or supporting older standards. Both my local shop and the webshop I use have all cassettes from 7-12 gears. Neither currently has 13 gear cassetes, though.

      • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yes, I have cycled a fair amount and raced too. Now I have downscaled my cycling to just getting around. Would you care to elaborate? If I was not clear I would like to explain myself. I knew many people who were always looking for the next upgrade to get a little performance boost, and willing to pay a great deal of money for it.

        • Aux@lemmy.worldBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          What’s to elaborate? Modern bikes are miles better than anything made 20 years ago and components last forever, especially ebike certified components. And you can still fix everything yourself for pennies. Including the most complex pneumatic suspension.

          • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I would argue the difference between modern bikes and old bikes for short to medium commutes (<1 hr) is immaterial. I have commuted on a carbon racing bike, an aluminum gravel bike (~£500) and a ~40 year old steel road bike I got for £20. Of course the carbon bike is very light and fast, but it has a massively greater ecological and financial cost. The aluminium gravel bike is pretty nice to ride, but not significantly different to the steel bike, which I actually find more comfortable on the road. The rotors on the gravel bike will soon need to be replaced, and that will probably be £100. I would agree with you that some modern components are better, notably corrosion resistant chains and puncture-resistant tyres. I would disagree on repair costs, in my experience, a repair at a shop in my city will cost at least £30 for something very simple like a new chain (which I can fit myself for less), and a while ago I had to pay £60 to replace a Di2 cable that got severed. (It went through the BB and I don’t have the tools to take out and refit a BB).

            • Aux@lemmy.worldBanned
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Puncture resistant tyres plus tubeless setup is already saving you and the planet a lot of resources.

              As for repair shop prices, well I fix everything myself. And that’s the whole point - unlike with all other tech, you can still fix your bike yourself and you can infinitely upgrade it if required.

      • appel@whiskers.bim.boats
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I can see this argument, but I just hate the way the industry is heading, to extract as much money as possible by selling upgrades, new frames, etc etc. The price of a new bike has also risen 2-3x since before COVID and won’t go down. Frame materials are becoming more resource intensive, parts are becoming less replaceable and more proprietary.

    • dcat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      all this does is to make sure to alienate the cyclists who would actually listen.

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Mother fucker we all about to die from climate change and you worried about how it might make people feel bad.

  • zer0@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    What’s mildly infuriating is that you are complaining about these protesters without providing any details on the protest.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Interrupting motorsports may give then more sympathy.

        Like when they glued themselves on a race track of Formula E electric racing because promoting emission free propulsion is apparently bad as well.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            It really depends on the energy generation mix on the country were they’re racing.

            Electricity generation is however emitting less and less (as renewables become an ever larger fraction of it) which makes electric cars directly have less emissions all the while requiring no vehicle changes whatsoever, something not all possible with non-electric means of motorised transportation since the “generate the energy” directly in the vehicle so you need to upgrade the vehicle to improve the energy generation.

            So yeah, that stuff is promoting emission free propulsion (already so today in some countries, certainly tomorrow in all), something which cannot be said of the other options.

            It’s pretty stupid to go after the “not yet perfectly ecological” alternative when there are a ton of “outright anti-Ecological and will never be any better” ones to go after.

      • kibiz0r
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        They tried that. Reddit’s unanimous opinion was that they should’ve been run over.