5 ms·

This would be true if I believed your argument is sound, but I don't believe that. You say terrorism is not appropriate, and we should do these other things. My

This would be true if I believed your argument is sound, but I don't believe that. You say terrorism is not appropriate, and we should do these other things. My question for you is, what should we do if those things have been ineffective? The goal is to get you to think more about what your are saying. Generally I would say the solution is to use every legal measure at our disposal including lawsuits[1], plus peaceful protest including blockades, to stop new fossil fuel projects from advancing and show corporations and politicians that we will not stop until the projects end. We also must learn about and pressure politicians to adopt rail and bike transit projects which aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our cities. We must advocate for right to repair so existing machinery is not discarded in favor of the manufacture of more equipment and its associated emissions. We must advocate for veganism and an end to extreme meat consumption and all of the emissions associated with it. There is SO MUCH we can do beyond personal habits and voting. [1] https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-youth-montana-trial-c7fdc1d8759f55f60346b31c73397db0 https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-youth-montana-tria...

vasco 3y ago
Some of the things you mention are not like the others, and many are not terrorism. To this line which I hear from time to time: "My question for you is, what should we do if those things have been ineffective?" I say, keep thinking. Specially if your answer is terrorism or para-terrorist activities.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  > Some of the things you mention are not like the others, and many are not terrorism. Just say what you mean please. What have I suggested which is terrorism?
  - vasco 3y ago
    If you read the original comment you replied to, you will see my only position is against terrorism, that is suggested as the next only possible step after lobbying and litigation. You piled on that train to again propose the idea that every single suggestion I made was innefective and therefore "what can we do?". Since my comment was purely denouncing terrorism, I made the obvious connection that this is what you proposed to do. You then mentioned a bunch of suggestions similar to my own suggestions in my original post, except for blocking roads which I believe is a serious offense as you do not know what you are blocking people from getting to, though I'm not sure it amounts to terrorism. If someone says "purple is bad" and you comment a bunch of reasons why purple is not bad, am I that much at fault to think you believe purple is good? If you are for democratic and societal change through legal means then you're with me. I'm sorry if I annoyed you for hinting that you were proposing terrorism, but please re-read the original comment and see how that might've happened, I also got annoyed myself due to the fact that I didn't think people would find offense to an anti-terrorist stance, so perhaps I exaggerated.
    - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
      What I found irritating is the suggestions to vote, form a new party, or change personal habits. It is surprising to hear someone in 2023 suggesting these things as these are all the things which have failed us for 20+ years. My point was not to advocate terrorism but to highlight the folly of your suggested alternatives. Your intention may have been purely to argue against terrorism but in the process you made other arguments I felt compelled to critique. I was not arguing in favor of terrorism.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        " It is surprising to hear someone in 2023 suggesting these things as these are all the things which have failed us for 20+ years" But maybe it is not all because of an evil elite, but also the very common people who don't believe or care about climate change, because it would mean bad consciousness or reduced comfort? And the people who say they care, but still fly around the world for a vacation? A scientific consensus alone is not enough, it needs a general human consensus that something needs to happen. And slowly slowly it is forming in some ways. In other ways things are going backward (russia for example is thinking out loud that climate change is just caused by earths natural radiactivity). But I also fail to see how terrorism can help create such a consensus.
        TaylorAlexander 3y ago
        I am not arguing in favor of terrorism! I am arguing against the idea that voting is enough. Put simply, in between voting and terrorism is activism and legal action (that is, using the legal system and suing organizations and governments as was done recently in Montana). > But maybe it is not all because of an evil elite Our system is elite-driven, and popular attitudes are strongly driven by elite manipulation through the media. > because it would mean bad consciousness or reduced comfort It would not mean this, but we have been led to believe it would mean this by an elite that doesn't want to make these changes due to reduced profits.
        hutzlibu 3y ago
- n3rv 3y ago
  At some point we're going to be forced to dump the Tea Into The River.

vasco 3y ago

Some of the things you mention are not like the others, and many are not terrorism. To this line which I hear from time to time: "My question for you is, what should we do if those things have been ineffective?" I say, keep thinking. Specially if your answer is terrorism or para-terrorist activities.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
> Some of the things you mention are not like the others, and many are not terrorism. Just say what you mean please. What have I suggested which is terrorism?
- vasco 3y ago
  If you read the original comment you replied to, you will see my only position is against terrorism, that is suggested as the next only possible step after lobbying and litigation. You piled on that train to again propose the idea that every single suggestion I made was innefective and therefore "what can we do?". Since my comment was purely denouncing terrorism, I made the obvious connection that this is what you proposed to do. You then mentioned a bunch of suggestions similar to my own suggestions in my original post, except for blocking roads which I believe is a serious offense as you do not know what you are blocking people from getting to, though I'm not sure it amounts to terrorism. If someone says "purple is bad" and you comment a bunch of reasons why purple is not bad, am I that much at fault to think you believe purple is good? If you are for democratic and societal change through legal means then you're with me. I'm sorry if I annoyed you for hinting that you were proposing terrorism, but please re-read the original comment and see how that might've happened, I also got annoyed myself due to the fact that I didn't think people would find offense to an anti-terrorist stance, so perhaps I exaggerated.
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    What I found irritating is the suggestions to vote, form a new party, or change personal habits. It is surprising to hear someone in 2023 suggesting these things as these are all the things which have failed us for 20+ years. My point was not to advocate terrorism but to highlight the folly of your suggested alternatives. Your intention may have been purely to argue against terrorism but in the process you made other arguments I felt compelled to critique. I was not arguing in favor of terrorism.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      " It is surprising to hear someone in 2023 suggesting these things as these are all the things which have failed us for 20+ years" But maybe it is not all because of an evil elite, but also the very common people who don't believe or care about climate change, because it would mean bad consciousness or reduced comfort? And the people who say they care, but still fly around the world for a vacation? A scientific consensus alone is not enough, it needs a general human consensus that something needs to happen. And slowly slowly it is forming in some ways. In other ways things are going backward (russia for example is thinking out loud that climate change is just caused by earths natural radiactivity). But I also fail to see how terrorism can help create such a consensus.
      - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
        I am not arguing in favor of terrorism! I am arguing against the idea that voting is enough. Put simply, in between voting and terrorism is activism and legal action (that is, using the legal system and suing organizations and governments as was done recently in Montana). > But maybe it is not all because of an evil elite Our system is elite-driven, and popular attitudes are strongly driven by elite manipulation through the media. > because it would mean bad consciousness or reduced comfort It would not mean this, but we have been led to believe it would mean this by an elite that doesn't want to make these changes due to reduced profits.
        hutzlibu 3y ago
n3rv 3y ago
At some point we're going to be forced to dump the Tea Into The River.