You must log in or # to comment.
I don’t think the artist understands the point of protesting when their argument is based on being inconvenienced as a driver.
Bad take after bad take from this cartoonist.
Here we go. So many bad takes here, so let me explain for those who don’t understand how protest works:
Stopping traffic doesn’t save the environment. Never has, never will. Neither does throwing paint on artwork or ancient monuments.
IT’S ABOUT ATTENTION. It’s about keeping the issue in the papers, on the TV, on the Facebook feed and front page of Reddit. Remember Extinction Rebellion? They used to do this shit then stopped because of the bad press. You hear about them anymore? Ever hear the phrase ‘there’s no such thing as bad press’? It’s true. Because as long as people are talking about you then you remain relevant.
Climate change is a global existential problem and it’s not going to be solved by ignoring it and hoping it will go away. Criticising the heroes who sacrifice their freedom to make the world a better place just marks you as a shortsighted legacy media chode. You’re worried about people being made late for work? Come see me again when the supermarket shelves are empty and everywhere between the tropics is unliveable.
I’m at the point where every time someone yells at me for protesting and tells me how useless it is, I chalk that up as a little sign of success, however small. If this guy is taking time out of his day to rant at me at length about what I’m doing, that means others are likely taking notice too.
Do I think protesting is going to magically solve the issue? Of course not. But it’s something I can do to bring attention to the issue, spread awareness, and encourage others who feel the same way but might feel alone or unsupported about it. I’m always happy to hear about what else I can do to better effect, but somehow that never seems to be something the naysayers are willing to provide. It’s always just tearing down, no advice or building up.
How does making cars idle save the environment?
That’s like looking at a tennis match and asking “how does wearing white win the game?”.
Ignoring context to feign confusion is some weaksauce trolling.
No, this isn’t me feigning ignorance. There are much better uses of a person’s time if their goal is environmentalism than sitting in traffic.
Possibly , but that’s not what you said.
The implication was that making cars idle was the point of blocking in the road, which is wasn’t/isn’t.
How does <this thing that i know was not the point> <fulfil the goal i know is unrelated to the thing i just mentioned> ?
A failure of sentence structure or purposeful trolling.
Is the joke “protesting is useless”, or “protest shouldn’t be inconvinient”?
Regardless, lmao got em.
