this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
362 points (91.7% liked)

World News

38583 readers
1946 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] seacocker@lemmy.world 177 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I have come here for a climate demonstration, not a political view

What he really means is that he only wants to hear about one slice of a political view, or he doesn't understand that climate change is a political subject too.

[–] MTK@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I'm gonna get downvoted for this but this is just wrong.

Climate change is science, not politics. We are trying to address it from multiple angles at the aame time (such as political angles, scientific angles, lifestyle angles, etc)

So the fight to make our politicians accept that climate change is sceince and not politics is, ironically, a political fight but climate change and the movments to stop it are not only political.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 44 points 10 months ago

Climate Change is, yes.

But the policies to combat it are not.

[–] interceder270@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago

Addressing climate change is politics.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 21 points 10 months ago

As Hbomb said, "People who say they don't like politics in games actually like politics in games the most, they just wish they were seeing different politics in games, and that's who Caesar's Legion is here to stroke off!"

[–] SamVergeudetZeit@feddit.de 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

No it's not! Fighting climate change can be addressed as legitimate issue to fix from both sides of the political spectrum. Talking about the gaza conflict and picking an arbitrary side, does nothing except, drive potential fff supporters away. People will hate Greta and everything she stands for even more. Only for virtue signaling points on social media.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Nah. She is spot on when she says that a movement for climate justice cannot ignored the marginalized, the oppressed, and those fighting for justice and freedom.

Those who would hate her for being anti-genocide and anti-apartheid are already very unlikely to be allies to the climate justice movement, a movement that highlights the way that impoverished peoples and nations, especially non-white non-european equatorial and global south nations, are uniquely suffering the consequences of climate change.

[–] jochem@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't see a connection between climate justice and justice for Palestinians, other than that it's both about justice. Could you elaborate why it's necessary to bring these seemingly unrelated struggles for justice together?

I btw totally see how a lot of social justice is tied to climate justice, but specifically the Palestinian struggle seems totally unrelated. Happy to change my mind.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] NAXLAB@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I think you might be narrowing the definition of politics. Something is political not just when two arbitrary political "sides" disagree. Something is a political issue when government policy is involved, and Greta is absolutely in the business of changing government policy. Climate change is also a political issue because it does create a divide among political groups: the rich and the poor. The people who own the most stuff will profit from irresponsible pollution, and have the most means to avoid its consequences. They will be using their political power to make sure things stay that way. The poor will suffer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world 82 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

I don't think this was a smart Move to mix these two issues. Israel & Palestine are so extremely polarizing and mixing this with climate might divide the People and weaken the fight for a green future. For example I would rather avoid that topic. I don't know enough about Palestine/Israel to publicly debate it. And if my climate-rally somehow turns to pro Palestine or pro Israel I would rather abstain from visiting it. Because I dont have a solid View on this topic. And I think I might not be alone with this feeling.

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 34 points 10 months ago

and people told MLK Jr. similar things when he spoke out against the Vietnam War. Activists fundamentally fight for justice, and as King said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." It might make sense in the short term to look the other way and conform, but when something so terrible happens due to actions from a western ally, it's good in the long term to have principles.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 10 months ago

I think the far left and far right have a similar problem here, in that you have to be "all in" on the group's talking points, for danger of being ostracised by your peers.

[–] Nevoic@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Activists don't need to be one-track minded. They rarely are. I'm a vegan, socialist, anti-fascist who is against the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and for climate justice globally. There's very strong overlap in these positions. There's a reason you won't find a lot of Republican vegans, or pro-Israel socialists.

Yes, sometimes people don't put in the time to investigate these issues, and I commend you for knowing the limits of your own knowledge, I've recommended to people before that it's better to just say "I don't know enough about this issue" instead of arriving at an under-researched position. However, it's not necessary to criticize people who are actually activists, learn about these issues, and go out into the world and advocate for change, so long as they're advocating for the right thing.

The topic being brought up might ostracize people, but it will also put the topic into people's minds. People like you might not know what the correct position is here, but you hear the constant pro-Israel propaganda pumped out by the U.S and might arrive at a subconscious conclusion that aligns with the imperial core.

If you hear people speaking out against the apartheid state of Israel, especially people who align with your values, you might be inclined to look into it more, or at the very least not automatically accept U.S propaganda on the issue.

[–] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

I have to disagree, the activists that really get things done do have a one-track mind, because it takes a lot of energy, money, and time to make any progress in just one issue. You can certainly care about many things, but you can't go to every conference, cover every issue in your speech, raise money for every cause, etc.

[–] Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Again. It creates divergence and weakens the awareness for the core Issue of this specific rally and might drive people away from it.

EDIT: Btw. it's pretty bold of you to assume you know what "the right thing" is especially on such an highly complex and diverse topic like Israel/Gaza.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 77 points 10 months ago (13 children)

She's never been afraid to speak her mind. How do we address the issue of climate change, if we turn a blind eye to the suffering of innocent people and children done intentionally for vengeance's sake?

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 41 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Well focus is generally useful for getting things done so one way to address climate change would be to stick to climate change discussion at climate change discussion events.

[–] bradbeattie@lemmy.ca 39 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Want to sabotage a protest? Encourage advocacy for increasingly tangential issues. Focus splits, folks start disagreeing on new issues, folks start disagreeing on how issues get prioritized, everything falls apart.

Sadly, this doesn't even require a malicious actor encouraging it. Well-meaning folks see a potentially sympathetic audience for their pet issue and boom.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] galloog1@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

Nothing builds a coalition as effectively as insisting that you absolutely must include a controversial but completely unrelated topic in the effort.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The linked article even fails to mention what exactly was "pro Palestinian" in the address - there's zero quotes. Shitty journalism.

Also, you can be "pro Palestinian" without being "anti Israel" - although a lot of shit-for-brains populists try to deny that these days.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 10 months ago

I remember we used to have anti-war rallies.

I don't recall them being painted as pro-Iraqi.

Can't we just go back to that, rather than being asked to pick sides in an issue where 99% of us have no skin in the game?

Why is is always Israel vs Palestine that gets trotted out for us? I don't remember being asked to picked sides in the Second Congo War, and that killed 5 million people over five years.

It's just divisive bullshit.

[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Only the sith deal in absolutes

[–] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Pretty ironic way to say it, Obi dude

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 14 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Greta Thunberg was interrupted as she addressed a climate protest in Amsterdam on Sunday after inviting a Palestinian and an Afghan woman on stage.

The Swedish activist was speaking to a crowd of tens of thousands in the Dutch capital before the country heads to the polls in a general election next week.

Earlier proceedings had been interrupted as a small group of activists at the front of the crowd waved Palestinian flags and chanted pro-Palestinian slogans.

The speeches on stage were the culmination of a mass protest that saw tens of thousands of people march through the streets of Amsterdam, urging for more action to tackle climate change.

Political leaders including former European Union climate chief Frans Timmermans, who now leads a centre-left, two-party bloc in the election campaign, later addressed the crowd in a square behind the landmark Rijksmuseum.

Event organiser, the Climate Crisis Coalition, said in a statement: "We live in a time of crises, all of which are the result of the political choices that have been made.


The original article contains 507 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

Good job by Greta by addressing the elephant in the room first. Nobody is going to take the moral police seriously while the west is supporting genocide. Any climate change protest already comes off as massive virtue signaling right now.

The entire point of preventing climate change is so humanity can continue to exist. The earth can exist without us. If we're gonna start a third world War right now you can forget about the 2050 stuff.

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Muddling up these two issues is so very stupid ... just keep the climate message on climate, how fucking hard is that?

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 70 points 10 months ago (9 children)

The driving force of climate change is the same reason for the military industrial complexe. Profits over people will always lead to these outcomes. You gotta be able to acknowledge and discuss this stuff.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago (4 children)

What funny is both issue are extremely linked.

Earlier this year, Isreal sign an agreement with Lebanon to help explore the area for gas and oil.

Isreal anounced a new middle East to supply eroupe with gas.

Iareal on October 19 or around ot awarded 12 companies the ability to explore gas and oil in the region.

The only thing that was stopping them is Hamas.

The expected value goes over 400 billion in the last few years, as expressed in a report by the UN about the gas field there.

[–] Broodjefissa@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Besides that i'd really like to know how much these sneseless wars contribute towards further polution. All the jets burning, ground vehicles moving, possibility of nukes

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] khalic@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Now that was a stupid move…

load more comments
view more: next ›