• deaf_fish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Without doing a moral calculation, what I can say is that shooting people in the head is less effective in dealing with climate change then blowing up oil pipelines.

      Blowing up oil pipelines will make it more expensive for oil companies to do business. This will decrease the amount of oil production which will directly effect how much CO2 is put into the atmosphere.

      How effective will it be? Will it stop climate change? Those questions are unknowable at this point in time. But it is pretty clear that we’re getting to a point where lots of people are going to start dying due to climate change.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree with you

          Wait, about what? Are you saying that shooting people in the head is more effective in dealing with climate change that blowing up oil pipelines?

          I think if we stop using oil hundreds of millions will starve in days

          I agree with this, and I never said we should stop using oil. I think we should definitely use less though. We should try to use as little as possible. We will still need plastics for medical stuff.

          Just don’t use violence because you don’t have a monopoly on it, we all can do it.

          A lot of people are about to die due to climate change. I think if you want them to not do violence, you had better start convincing them that they have a shot to survive this. Telling them that violence is bad is not going to do it. Honestly, blowing up a few pipes is pretty low price, all things considered. Things have the possibility to get much worse than some property damage.

          I would 100% prefer that governments take action to slow down oil production and push hard for more climate friendly policies, but they are not.

    • explodicle@local106.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The excessive pollution is aggression. More people will die from climate change than from lack of oil, regardless of what you think.

    • Franzia
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is an appropriate place for coordinated political violence and it’s absolutely never, officer ;)

    • zbyte64
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean if removing people from the equation is on the table then targeting billionaires with a carbon footprint of small nations would be the logical place to start.

      That aside, this meme is calling for collective violent action against infrastructure. Your example is an individual violent action against a person.

        • zbyte64
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Does self-defense count as violence? Because forcefully dismantling the oil infrastructure can save lives and it would be nonviolent as long as the police don’t start with their violence.

            • zbyte64
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oil companies literally employ violence to beat protesters, house arrest their lawyers, make advocates disappear but we’re not allowed to defend ourselves. Got it.

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Blowing up pipelines doesn’t kill anyone. I know you think property damage is worse than murder, but sane people don’t think that.