You must log in or register to comment.

DuckDuckGoProudhon t1_j6bhwj9 wrote

So many comments about protests being bad for disrupting business as usual as if that's not the point of the protest. The leaders in our worlds only care about "the economy" so disrupting that repeatedly is the only way to get their attention.


120GoHogs120 t1_j6i51xh wrote

I think it's a fine line to walk. If you're too much of a dick to normal people or make their lives worse, it can have the opposite affect to their goals.


DuckDuckGoProudhon t1_j6iehqq wrote

I disagree. The protest is aimed at the capitalist class and centered around denying them profit. With enough disruption the capitalists must change their methods to continue making money.

It's not a protest to persuade people or change their opinion. As others have said, people already know what they think about climate change.


Falstaffe t1_j6gx4os wrote

The leaders only care about their individual gigaprofits, and getting oneself arrested for blocking traffic doesn't even begin to scratch that.


DuckDuckGoProudhon t1_j6hr6b0 wrote

Blocking the only road to the Hague interrupts supply lines and deliveries, damaging profits. There's not some secret cabal that controls the world, politicians are reliant on the support of the Capitalist class and not some individuals.


puiterken t1_j6mo148 wrote

Finally somebody who gets it. People act like they cut the power of an entire country for a day.


pyr666 t1_j6dm6nb wrote

> So many comments about protests being bad for disrupting business as usual as if that's not the point of the protest.

the greatest thing the establishment has ever done is convince you this is sufficient.


DuckDuckGoProudhon t1_j6e5ijn wrote

I never said it was.

Also "the establishment"? Really? Are we gonna talk about fake news next?

You gotta educate yourself.


pyr666 t1_j6ecq95 wrote

> Also "the establishment"? Really?


maybe take your own advice.


DuckDuckGoProudhon t1_j6el9pw wrote

The word you're looking for is Hegemon. Wikipedia isn't a good source for education.


marcingrzegzhik t1_j6b3v7a wrote

Wow, that's really impressive. Climate activists are really going out of their way to make sure their voices are heard. Good on them.


Falstaffe t1_j6b7adv wrote

They’re only saying what everyone already knows, though, aren’t they? Sure, they’ll feel better because they did something with their aggression, but it’s ritual. We know the message, we know how it’s going to play out, come Monday they won’t have brought the problems any closer to a solution. Pretty disruptive way to be a cliche.

On Friday, I had to undergo a painful medical procedure. On the way, there was a truck accident up ahead which meant that instead of getting to the clinic in 15 minutes, I was on the road for an hour and a half. During that unexpected delay, the painkiller I took for the procedure wore off. I had no more with me and the clinic had none to give me. So I underwent that painful procedure without the benefit of a painkiller. Now, that was due to a truck accident. If that delay had been due to a climate activist deciding I needed to be told that something needs to be done about our fucked-up climate, I would not be very sympathetic.


nagrom7 t1_j6fkq9f wrote

> They’re only saying what everyone already knows, though, aren’t they?

Sadly, there's still a lot of people who clearly haven't got the message.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_j6c2dk4 wrote

Agreed with your first sentences. I seriously doubt bringing "awareness" to climate change is changing many minds at this point. Most people know what it is, kids will learn about it, and will make up their mind. I think that energy/time could be better spent actively impacting the environment in a positive way, or contributing something other than "awareness" for something as widely known as climate change at least.


sirthunksalot t1_j6bvcin wrote

It's time for mass protests. Hope this is just the beginning of the youth standing up for their planet against old idiots destroying it for cash.


Most_Ruin_3005 t1_j6df4dt wrote

Protests, strikes, and riots. Things only get better if we make them get better.


GibbysUSSA t1_j6f05lg wrote

Everything is done for short term gains with no concern for long term consequences. I hope that people start taking this seriously, but I am also concerned that we've already crossed an event horizon of sorts.


LiliNotACult t1_j6bd21x wrote

I love the comment section in these threads. So many people are missing the point of climate change, our entire fucking species is going to die off.


space-ish t1_j6ckfbf wrote

Agree, but two comments:

  1. Humans as a species will survive. However the effects of climate change will not effect everyone uniformly. People who are not well off will bear the brunt of climate change (forget cars, these people already don't even have proper drinking water).

  2. Other species will be affected if their niche environments change


GinTonicDev t1_j6cjdul wrote

Humans are crazy motherfuckers. We are the evil monsters that other animals dream about. The humans that made it through the ice age were evolutionary the same humans as we are today.

Humanity will be fine.

Civilasation as we know it today and hundred of millions, if not billions of people on the other hand...


puiterken t1_j6mo65d wrote

If humans weren't selfish, we wouldn't have climate problems this severe in the first place.


darthjoey91 t1_j6cfsku wrote

The species will be fine. Humans are really adaptable. Like yeah, people will die from stuff that wasn't really their fault, but that already happens every day.

But we do have a decent idea on how to fix it. There's just a lot of money in not fixing it.


Cimatron85 t1_j6cl4ix wrote

Ah yes. Nothing like a good ol existential threat.

People don’t see how this can and is and will be weaponized. After all, we’re on a mission to save the world!

It very much reminds me of the infallibility of religion. Don’t ask critical questions and, as long as you’re doing it in the name of Mother Earth, anything is justified.


Bjorn2bwilde24 t1_j6bfw4z wrote

You mustve missed the point about how the protest is causing cars to still in traffic, while running and pumping more Greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.


m1k3tv t1_j6bqgf6 wrote

That's a ridiculous argument, in the face of millions of cars idling for thousands of hours.


LiliNotACult t1_j6bqjkg wrote

If a protest isn't causing a disruption then it is ignored.


Bhxtwy t1_j6if4v0 wrote

But is it not arrogant to disrupt society because of personal beliefs?


Uncle_Charnia t1_j6b7gjr wrote

Some of the people in stopped traffic are on their way to care for children, dependent elders, and developmentally disabled adults. Some are on their way to court, and if they are late, an abusive or negligent parent will get custody. Some are hospice nurses on their way to help a patient in agony. Some are on court supervision, and will go to prison if they don't go straight home or straight to work. Some are diabetic with plummeting blood sugar. Some are police officers on their way to a distress call. Some are bringing dozens or hundreds of paychecks from a bank to a workplace. Some have diarrhea. Some have enlarged prostates and urinary tract infections, and need to stop frequently to urinate. Some are on their first week on a job their families desperately need. Some have infants in the car. Never, ever block traffic. There are other ways to effect positive change. Use your imagination. Have a heart.


thijser2 t1_j6c1k8j wrote

The road they blocked has an easy bypass, traffic was not significantly impacted, it is the last bit of a highway before it ends. Remember Den Hague is a seaside city, meaning that a highway going east-west is going to end there(this is the a12). During the protests my google maps suggested a 3 minute detour* if I wanted to get to Nassaubuurt (other side of the protests).

Another interesting question is the legal one, the protesters said they were planning on closing down the highway so the government closed it for them. Does that mean they even did anything unlawful?

Another bit of background: recently, Dutch farmers closed down almost all highways by driving their tractors on them and dumping trash on them to protest environmental regulations. Almost nobody was arrested for that. However, shortly before these climate demonstrations most of the organizers were arrested. This greatly increased the size of these demonstrations as they were joined by oxfam novib and others because it was a great example of how climate protestors are punished far harder than industrial/commercial-based protests.

*Assuming of course that you aren't willing to take public transport as the region has excellent accessibility by train/tram/bus (the whole thing happened in sight of Den Hague central station.)


DougDougDougDoug t1_j6cd93n wrote

Yeah, protests aren’t supposed to be for your fucking convenience.


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6cjayj wrote

If your protest is causing innocent people to be hurt or killed, you’re doing it wrong.


GeneraalSorryPardon t1_j6ckyfo wrote

If your protest isn't causing any inconvenience you're doing it wrong. Because if it doesn't politicians will simply ignore the protest.


Uncle_Charnia t1_j6dm9p4 wrote

This isn't about convenience. It's about harm.


palcatraz t1_j6dmqb2 wrote

Feel free to produce evidence to prove anyone was harmed by this protest.


Uncle_Charnia t1_j6ebquy wrote

Every time people deliberately block traffic, the impose an increased risk of harm on others. It is immoral.


GeneraalSorryPardon t1_j6e1eh2 wrote

The news is bringing it like a major highway was disrupted: This is simply not true. Also, no one was harmed so I don't know what you mean by that.


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6d5mag wrote

And these road protests are getting the job done? Politicians don’t care about inconvenience, they care about votes. If you convince the electorate to support your cause then the politician is forced to comply. You don’t get that by pissing off locals.

Not to mention people die because of these road blockages.


crafting-ur-end t1_j6d5tfl wrote

Politicians certainly care about the economy


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6dhcw0 wrote

Yeah, because voters care about the economy.


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6f0oas wrote

Yes, politicians care about the economy because their constituents care about the economy. My comment was not sarcastic.


Rpanich t1_j6fg1kl wrote

So you now understand why it’s important that protestors do things that harm the economy so that they are not ignored by politicians?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6gz5ng wrote

Blocking a road for a few hours isn’t hurting the economy in any meaningful way. It’s just angering the people you need to have on your side and giving your detractors a lot of ammunition to use against your cause.

Public perception is the entire point here. If you lose the public then it doesn’t really matter what you disrupt.

If disrupting things alone worked, why haven’t animal rights activists ever made any meaningful progress? They block trucks from entering slaughter houses and cause disruptions at restaurants or clothing stores. That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?


Rpanich t1_j6i6dc8 wrote

> That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?

Wait, are you now changing your argument to “politicians don’t care about the economy”?

Didn’t we just decide that politicians DO care about the economy?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6ia8ec wrote

I never said politicians care about the economy. I said politicians care about whatever their constituents care about


Rpanich t1_j6iakw2 wrote

So if politicians care about the economy because voters care about the economy, then what do you mean by this?

> That’s definitely causing an economic effect so why haven’t politicians done anything?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6ibkpd wrote

If the reasons politicians made public policy were based on economic reasons, why haven’t we seen any major changes to the meat industry?

Protestors block roads to slaughter houses, disrupt operations at factory farms, and routinely engage in actions that screw up the daily operations of restaurants that sell meat or stores that sell animal products.

Why does that economic disruption fail but you think the same kind of disruption on a road would work?


Rpanich t1_j6ie45k wrote

So if you are saying that economic disruption will work, but it has not worked yet, is the thing that you are calling for larger scale economic disruptions?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6in25i wrote

I’m saying you need to get the voting populace on your side.

>Why does that economic disruption fail but you think the same kind of disruption on a road would work?

Care to answer?


Rpanich t1_j6iqakr wrote

> Why does that economic disruption fail

Well, according to your logic, because it wasn’t a sufficient amount?

Or are you saying that politicians don’t care about economic disruption?

What are you calling for?

Because it sounds like you either don’t believe that politicians care about the economy, or that you want protestors to do larger economic disruptions.


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6j844n wrote

So you’re only going to answer by asking questions, gotcha.


Rpanich t1_j6j8u9p wrote

I’ve simply been asking you to clarify your first message, which seemed to be sarcastically saying that politicians don’t care about the economy, and then turning heel and then claiming you were earnestly claiming that when faced with evidence; which is strange because if so, you seem to be arguing against yourself.

Can you simply clarify your statement and state your stance clearly?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jbpxh wrote

Where do you think the line between causing economic consequences with a protest and turning the voting group against you lies?


Rpanich t1_j6jc794 wrote

Are we answering questions by asking questions now?


slide_into_my_BM t1_j6jk3mz wrote

It’s easy to argue a point when you don’t have one


Rpanich t1_j6jm80k wrote

Uh yeah, which is why I called you out on trying to save face when being met with evidence.

The point I made was: voters care about the economy, and that you need to clarify your argument, which you have refused to do.

I’ll rebut your argument once you make one, but so far all I’ve done is fact check you while you tried to save face/ avoided making a clear argument.


puiterken t1_j6moc8a wrote

So forcing people to make a slight detour is hurting and killing people? This is basically the same situation as a traffic accident. People will need to find another route. And you know what, that's exactly what you can do with a car.


kstinfo t1_j6bs08v wrote

> on their way to care for children

Not to worry. Those kids probably won't make it in the new environment anyway.


GinTonicDev t1_j6cj04q wrote

Those people are expecting that either themself or their children will die a rather ugly death due to the climate crisis. Have a heart - but also make a rescue alley when in a traffic jam.


Sebekiz t1_j6bc3yc wrote

Also while they are blocking traffic all those vehicles are sitting there idling, spewing the very greenhouse gases they are protesting against. If the goal is to reduce GHG emissions, forcing people to burn extra gas while they sit in a traffic jam that the activists created is achieving the exact opposite effect. And it angers a lot of people who are then less likely to support their agenda.

But they do get to pat themselves on the back and give themselves participation awards for "doing something" about a crisis that continues to go on exactly as it was the day before.


GinTonicDev t1_j6clqzg wrote

The amount of CO2 put into our atmosphere due to this traffic jams is basicly 0, if you meassure it against what needs to be changed.


jigokubi t1_j6ba1w4 wrote

What I like to do to bring someone over to my cause is piss them off. Works like a charm.


Raspberry-Famous t1_j6cwslf wrote

If your support was contingent on you never being slightly inconvenienced then your support is pretty much worthless.


GibbysUSSA t1_j6f14yj wrote

People are complaining about being inconvenienced by protests... do they think that the effects of climate change won't bring maybe a modicum of inconvenience?


jigokubi t1_j6e8pd7 wrote

I would say anyone trying to get to the hospital for an emergency was more than slightly inconvenienced.

But it has nothing to do with me being inconvenienced. If a group is known for being assholes, I might think twice before listening to their views.


DougDougDougDoug t1_j6cdhlt wrote

Yeah, totally man. I’m now for ending life on earth because I was late getting to the gym. Great point


[deleted] t1_j6cjl0c wrote



Raspberry-Famous t1_j6cxoqm wrote

Don't worry, when we get to the point where we're having to fuck around with geoengineering to head off the worst effects of climate change we may well get a nuclear war on top of climate change.

Climate change is a particularly difficult topic to whatabout because it's gonna make all these other problems worse.


DougDougDougDoug t1_j6de18i wrote

Oh, this is cute. It’s a guy who thinks the only problem is climate change.


GinTonicDev t1_j6cjnhu wrote

Because education and peacefull protests worked like a charm in the past... is it 50 years allready?


AvogadrosMoleSauce t1_j6ddxpi wrote

I'd prefer to see climate activists dragging fossil fuel executives to the Hague.


TubbywubbyTV t1_j6cxlu8 wrote

Yikes this news sub is always a battle 🤣


MNnocoastMN t1_j6d0taz wrote

Why don't these activists actually show up at the oil companies properties, the runways full of private jets, GOV'T buildings. Just impeding regular peoples day. Why inconvenience me when you're mad at shell and Exxon??


LaminatedDenim OP t1_j6danph wrote

What makes you say we don't? We protest in all those places, and also on the highway right next to the ministry of economic affairs and the ministry of agriculture. The place is very appropriate, and it has parallel roads so that traffic is only mildly hindered. What better place to protest against those two governments than right here?


graveybrains t1_j6if4o4 wrote

If it doesn’t make the front page, it never happened.


Agent__Caboose t1_j6cqu7z wrote

I guess it's not selfish farmers for once.


puiterken t1_j6mo3hu wrote

I love it.

One question: how did they start this? How did they start blocking the highway without getting run over?


LaminatedDenim OP t1_j6mpkl5 wrote

The plan was to have a couple of cars drive slowly and then stop. This is more of an entrance to a highway than the actual highway itself, traffic comes from a big intersection with traffic lights so the speed is still relatively low anyway.

Instead, the police halted those vehicles and arrested the people in it. They then proactively blocked the highway themselves, I believe.


Fencius t1_j6cjtyu wrote

Less roads, more docks. Start sinking yachts and at least you’ll be hurting the people who deserve it.


cLuckb t1_j6c5n0t wrote

You can protest as much as you want, but at the end of the day, it's up to governments to do something about climate change, and governments simply aren't going to bend the need to climate protesters. They would simply pass bills that make these protests even harder to do.

What needs to happen is people to elect politicians that would do something about climate change, but these kinds of disruptive protests are hurting public perception of people who want to do something about climate change, making it impossible to elect said politicians.


bjj_climber_guy t1_j6d032e wrote

No prediction is more certain than that if we follow your ideas, nothing will be done about climate change.


[deleted] t1_j6bodbw wrote



peterkeats t1_j6cf49d wrote

We accidentally make the world cleaner and healthier?


DougDougDougDoug t1_j6cdign wrote

So, if science isn’t real?


GinTonicDev t1_j6cl69u wrote

Science was wrong in the past, basicly all the time.

Just read up upon the history of climate science. Its fascinating how fast things escalated. A hundred years ago, the believe was that we still had hundreds of years of time, till the temperature change would be measurable...

But bad jokes aside... does it matter if they are right? More importantly: Is there any reason to believe that the results of science of over 100 years is flawed?


GinTonicDev t1_j6ck4hf wrote

That obviously depends on what "being wrong" implies. Even if all that C12 vs C13 thing and what it does to our atmosphere does is wrong and just a "happy random missunderstanding", because we missed something.... we most likely still fought for a healthier world.

The risks of being right and continuing to ignore the issue most likely outweight the risks of being wrong by far.