Peaceful Resistance vs Eco-Terrorism

«The proper way to fix the world isn’t to fix the world. It’s to fix yourself.»

It is interesting to see how protests have changed over time. Thinking about successful protests, like the civil rights movement in the USA in the 1960s or so, or Gandhi in India. They did it peacefully. Or mostly peaceful in an actual, non-CNN, way. Heck, many were even well-dressed. Many did show a respect — for themselves and others. Even for things — like taking off your shoes when you climb upon a car to speak to the crowd.

Compare that to the wanna-be eco-terrorists today — blocking roads or (mock-)destroying art. And I use the term wanna-be terrorists deliberately, in the sense of its definition: «a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims» (Apple Dictionary). Combined with «wanna-be», given they are protected by left-wing politicians and left-wing media.

And yeah, it’s a small group of people who tries to gain attention and (ostensibly) political influence via unlawful — and undemocratic — measures. It’s not a peaceful demonstration, its blocking roads and trying to get into the news by throwing fluids on artworks or glueing yourself to them. While blocking roads has not yet reached the levels of direct violence against people, the effects have already cause casualties. Waiting on those roads were ambulances, for example. And even if these mock-Taliban have not actually destroyed paintings in museums, it’s only because they were protected by glass.

I also question whether they are actually trying to affect change, or whether they desperately claw for any sense of meaning or relevance. Frankly, they remind me of this quotations:

«Supergirl embodies the worst traits of her generation. The earnestness without purpose, the unshakable belief that she has a right to be heard, even when she has nothing to say.»

Yeah, it was said by a rather questionable character, but it still fits. And if they were actually trying to «save» the world, they would study hard and look for better solutions. But it’s easier to glue yourself to the street and throw a temper tantrum to get a pony. Sorry, that would produce too much methane, I guess. Still, you don’t even seen them working a ricksha service any time soon. This kind of «protest» behavior is neither smart nor creative, but arrogant and frankly rather embarrassing.

I also think they are being used — after all, they are being financed. And while the «green leap forward» might sound like a nice idea, it might have to do more with Mao’s «great leap forward». There are a lot of problems with using only regenerative energy and removing fossil fuels. And there is also a lot of money and political power that can be gained by promoting it. In this sense, these eco-terrorists are more like the «useful idiots» of the past, or perhaps future «brownshirts», sorry, «greenshits».

I also wonder when the whole thing will turn violent. Directly violent that is. When either they will move up to using force that can — and will — easily kill innocents. For example, destroying an ostensibly empty building and killing squatters. Not that far a leap up considering they already have an indirect body count (blocked ambulances) and their rhetoric provides them with a justification (the usual «what is a few people to save the world/gain utopia»). Or when those they want to control will have enough. Who cares about protestors glued to the street if you have 80 PS and car insurance? I do not condone violence — that is the whole point of the posting — but if you sow the wind, you will reap the whirlwind.

Finally, these idiots remind me of something that was said about wannabe-satanists decades ago. Changing it to these so-called activists it would sound something like this:

«Activists have power only as long as they are seen as powerful. If you look closely, the woke, loud climate-savior can turn quickly into an unfortunate asocial basket-case with an unhappy childhood.»

And yeah, our future deserves (to be) better.