• gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    What makes the jets effective but stone henge not?

    Seriously what effects have the jetshave vs stone henge? Did it rally a bunch of people to the cause? Did it make the fossil field companies rethink their ways? Convince the MPs to stop oil investment? Make the owners of those jets not want to fly them?

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Did the other thing achieve any of that?

      I’ll say the jets were effective in that I don’t like the jets while I am primed to try to physically stop you from doing the other thing if you try it in front of me. And I already agree with the underlying point already, so imagine how the normies that don’t think about this at all feel.

      “Ah, a cartoonish self-parody of activists defacing a monument I’ve spent my entire life feeling a sense of kinship with, I feel compelled to rethink my stance on this dry, complex political issue”. That’s a bold pitch for a PR stunt.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, but I, nor anyone else claimed they were going to.

        The other commentor said the jet protests were effective whereas stonehenge was not. So I’m just asking what effect it had? Because at least the Stonehenge protest was big news, which was the whole point of the protest.