• alliswell33 @lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “We blocked the port in order to stop the use of fossil fuels that are killing innocent people,” she said. “The real crimes continue inside the gate of the port. We are not going to sit and wait while the fossil fuel industry takes our dreams away from us.” Asked if she’s worried about the consequences of the trial, she replied: “I personally am more worried about the horrible harm the fossil fuel industry is doing to the world.” “I’m not going to stop while they are threatening the planet.”

    Much of the oil and gas industry says that continued production is necessary in order to meet global energy demands. Cutting oil and gas production would be “dangerous and irresponsible”, the head of energy company Shell told BBC News. The International Energy Agency has said that there can be no new investments in oil, gas and coal now if governments are serious about the climate crisis. UN chief António Guterres recently said investment in new oil and gas production was “economic and moral madness”. This week the world experienced its hottest day on record on Tuesday, topping 17C for the first time.

    Our world burns and people suffer so that oil companies can turn a profit. The few are making decisions that will have disasterous effects on the many in the not too distant future.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Asked if she’s worried about the consequences of the trial, she replied: “I personally am more worried about the horrible harm the fossil fuel industry is doing to the world.” “I’m not going to stop while they are threatening the planet.”

      This. This is activism. I’m not brave enough to face a justice system hostile to my existence like she does, so I’m glad she’s there to do it.

  • figaro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely amazing. For those who say are saying that it was too extremist of a position, I’d say fuck off. She is doing what we all need to be doing. Oil companies and governments aren’t going to help us out of the climate catastrophe that is coming. They simply aren’t. Capitalism will not allow it. This is the only option we have left.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, that’s assuming they get to keep their money. My preference would be that we need to start taking it, but that likely won’t happen. They won’t help out of good will, but hopefully we can make them help by force.

    • el_cordoba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Something that intrigued me was how Martin Luther King managed to do so much through nonviolent protest. Rosa Parks refusal to give up her seat and the bus boycotts made people realize how absurd and unfair Jim Crow laws were.

      He even participated in a sit in at a department store and was arrested for it. People were getting arrested in such numbers for such simple things it made people think about what King and his followers were trying to do.

      I have no doubts that Ms. Thunberg has good intentions, but her protests are simply ineffective. In this case, “blockading” an oil port just frustrates people for delaying a crucial product.

      • taigaman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know, man. I’m not saying it was the best thing that could’ve been done, but at least she’s actually trying to get us to stop cooking ourselves. It wasn’t like she went full blown eco terrorist.

  • Hyperreality@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

    John F. Kennedy, 1962

  • Turtle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good. Stopping people from doing their jobs or inconveniencing the public aren’t how you should protest. You deserved to be locked up for doing that. If you don’t like something, you advertise and get the word around so you can eventually get it fixed going through the correct systems.

  • donut4ever@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We all need to do something. Is anyone noticing the heat waves? Holy shit! We are fucking dying very slowly.

    • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      So why was she protesting the building of a wind farm a few weeks ago?

      I find it funny how her protesting something hugely beneficial was met with general silence.

      • vesuv@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well because the wind farms are destroying Sami land? And other alternative placements exist for the wind farms, but not for the reindeer the Sami hunt. Agree or not, but it’s not because she’s protesting the concept of wind farms in Norway.

        • RustyWizard@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          To be more blunt, the comment was an outright mischaracterization, and if not out of ignorance, then a pure lie. Typical bullshit used to discredit people offhand.

            • RustyWizard@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Look, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here in assuming you’re asking that question honestly and not trying to start a debate about whether or not this dishonest nature of the comment constitutes a lie.

              So why was she protesting the building of a wind farm a few weeks ago?

              I find it funny how her protesting something hugely beneficial was met with general silence.

              The comment is set up to try and make Greta appear hypocritical. She’s supposed to be an environmentalist and she’s protesting wind farms? The comment goes on to extrapolate that to the entire environmentalist community being hypocrites because the protest “was met with general silence”.

              What it leaves out is the context of the protest, which had absolutely nothing to do with the windmill, but rather the development of land use by peoples who don’t have the political power to prevent it.

              It’s akin to you protesting a children’s hospital being put in your backyard and then being accused of hating sick children.

              In other comments, OP says “I work in the industry and windmills aren’t a problem”, blah, blah, blah. This purposely misses the point that the problem is development of these people’s land against their will, whether it be a windmill or a Walmart. You can be an environmentalist who is pro windfarm and still have an issue with exploiting people, even if that exploitation is to put up wind farms.

        • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          How are wind farms “destroying Sami land”? Please fill me in.
          Full disclosure, I work in the industry so I would LOVE to know how a wind turbine tower which at it’s base is typically no more than 5 m in diameter (15’) is destroying anything when wind farms are commonly installed on farm land with essentially no disruption to the field and it’s use to grow food.

          • axexrx@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is just a guess, but could the vibrations / low frequency sound be bad for / drive away animals they hunt? I know my community has rebuffed attempts at an offshore one for those reasons and the effect on our fisheries. (I understand sound propagation through water is quite a different beast, but thats my conjecture)

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t mean to be a dick, but if everybody’s gonna make changes could these Sami folks eat something else?

        • Serpent10i@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The context is that it’s being built on indigenous land which they use for herding. So it’s not perfect, for their side, but it’s definitely not “Greta is against wind power”

          • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Wind farms are commonly installed on farm land as well as land used to herd animals. So explain to me why THIS land is any different? It’s not. But she was bafflingly protesting against it.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You can find out for yourself rather than attempting to discuss in bad faith.

              • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                See recent thread about “just google it” mantra.

                Conversation is helpful. Even with people who disagree with you.

                • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “it’s not” shows that the person has already made their mind up and done their reading, so I’m not particularly bothered about engaging people like this as they are not actually interested and are just trying to derail in bad faith.

  • tomas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    She should be getting a Nobel prize for putting a rapist sex-trafficker in prison with a single tweet.

    • Vikthor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You suggesting that Romanian authorities rely on tweets of some social media celebrity to arrest another one is not that different from Top scumbag himself suggesting he can bribe his way to stay away from prison in Romania. Both are pretty insulting to Romania.

      Granted, yours isn’t as bad, yet you should still reconsider your position.

    • LocutusOfBeetleBorg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Though I wish this were true it is not. Romanian authorities, specifically Ramona Bolla of DIICOT confirmed that the tweet had nothing to do with locating him.

      • venusenvy47@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that is necessarily relevant. Romania didn’t seem to be in a hurry to arrest him until she made the post. I think the more relevant thing she did was to embarrass Romania into action.

  • pleasemakesense@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like you guys don’t understand how the laws work in sweden, you can’t just pick and choose who you charge (I expect that it’s like that in any non-corrupt country)

    • TechnoBabble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even in relatively corruption-free countries, there are often shadow mechanisms the governments uses to decide who they charge with a crime.

      Prosecutors can just say they don’t have a case, or they can fumble the case purposefully in the initial stages to give credence to the “no case” idea.

      We don’t have to look any further than how police charge themselves to see how the laws don’t fairly apply to everyone. And a simple google search will reveal that Sweden is not immune to police corruption, which shouldn’t surprise anyone.

      “Disobeying police orders”, which is what Thunberg was charged with, is one of those catch-all laws that are purposefully vague in a way that allows police total discretion over how to enforce it.

      I guarantee in this case that calls were made all the way up the top of the Swedish government before police decided what to do here.

      Basically, my point is that there are so many strings to pull, even in developed countries, that it’s often possible to suss out the motivations of the administration just by examining how charges proceed.

      What this says about Thunberg getting charged for her actions? Probably nothing significant. Sweden cannot allow activists to freely disrupt their economic infrastructure, especially those involving energy. So they charge her as “normal” regardless of her celebrity status. Though they will be very careful to do everything by the book with so many eyes on the case.

      • pleasemakesense@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You talking about the same government that allowed two different people to burn the Quran, one Infront of the Turkish embassy, while being blocked by turkey to join Nato? I don’t think you guys understand, sure there is corruption in Swedish politics, but if any of them tried to influence the rule of law? They’d be unbelievably fucked

        E: I’m literally swedish wtf

  • BJHanssen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The purpose and function of the police and the courts is the protection of capital from the people. Some cases illustrate this more clearly than others. This is one of them.