3 ms·
I don't disagree with their right to protest in seemingly vandalistic ways (read your history). I don't agree that priceless art is above the importance of our
by LightBug1 2y ago
I don't disagree with their right to protest in seemingly vandalistic ways (read your history).
I don't agree that priceless art is above the importance of our planet or the lives of people.
But I do disagree with their tactics. But only because they are not working. They are getting attention, but at the expense of the logical failure of the recipients of the message through their outrage.
- simondotau 2y agoTheir tactics don't work because they aren't choosing tactics based on effectiveness. Attention is all they care about, because they're narcissists.
- LightBug1 2y agoPossibly. I wouldn't know. It's possible you don't either.
- simondotau 2y agoSure, if you want to be pedantic, it's impossible to know anyone's true motives for anything. Actually we're talking about a group of people, so each person in the group will have their own set of (potentially wildly divergent) motives. Well played, sir. What I can (and in fact did) say with a high level of certainty is that they aren't choosing their tactics based on effectiveness. They're choosing their tactics based on maximising attention on themselves. This is consistent with narcissism. Of course we don't have to read minds in order to judge someone's actions. If someone says they want <A>, and they continuously persist in doing a thing which has no plausible pathway of ever achieving <A>, but is reliably and consistently achieving <B>, it's reasonable to infer that what they actually care about is <B>.
- edanm 2y ago> I don't agree that priceless art is above the importance of our planet or the lives of people. This is just a false dichotomy. You don't, in general, have to choose between priceless art and the importance of our planet.