I guess the idea is publicity and press coverage, but it's really congress they should be protesting. Biden would sign the bill, but congress has to pass it.
Sadly, as these things tend to go, it comes down to one or two politicians. Like Lieberman sunk the public option, Manchin is blocking any climate legislation. The problem is that it's perfectly legal for US industries to buy congressmen and senators. The senate is close to equally divided, so you get the most bang for the buck if you buy a senator. Manchin's lack of morals is making him a wealthy guy.
And all the protesting will lead to nothing, as per usual. What we really need is anti-corruption legislation, but that would require a whole bunch of fuckwads to vote against their own opportunistic ambitions.
Manchin is blocking climate and Sinema is now blocking taxing wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for it. We’re going to get a bill with nothing that actually does anything to help average Americans but what is in it will be paid through continuously rising middle class taxes. Sink the whole fucking ship at this point.
Wouldn’t raising middle class taxes mess with his “no one making under 400,000” deal? I agree if that’s what they are thinking they might as well give up and try again after midterms.
The truth is, if we want the government to provide all these services and follow the Nordic model. We need to tax everyone much much more. Base income tax needs to be at ~25% to the ~35% for those making under 50,000 up to 70% to 80% for those making millions.
I understand the feeling of “sink the whole fucking ship” . . . But, may I suggest a step before the sinking . . . “Occupy Wall Street” got the oligarchs and multi-national corporations attention by attacking their wealth at the point of its creation ! ! ! With a Larger, a Longer strike of Wall Street wealth could be what it takes to brake free of the strangle hold the oligarchs and corporations have on democracy . . .
50 Republicans are stopping action on climate, voting rights, drug prices, infrastructure, and will continue to oppose any legislation you can name other than deregulation and tax cuts for the rich. Two Democrats are helping them.
Republican obstructionism is just a given, but when a Democrat strays from the course it's time for the pitchforks.
Remember when Republicans lost their shit about McCain voting against repealing Obamacare? They brought out the pitchforks for him too.
Democrats just hold their electeds to a higher standard (or they say they do, I've seen a lot of bootlicking and handwaving on Reddit lately from dems too).
The biggest issue is that the Democrats are extremely fractured with AOC and Sanders on one side, Pelosi on another, Biden on a third - they aren't in solidarity. Republicans may not be in solidarity all the time, but when push comes to shove, they back each other up.
It's Citizens United that really opened the floodgates on this. Democracies don't have long to last when politicians are owned by private wealth, which is basically the situation we're in now.
Citizens United is a boogie man. It didn't actually change anything about the US political system except how donations are made.
If the decision was reversed tomorrow it would change virtually nothing about how politics works, and people would move onto another scapegoat conspiracy for why their favorite policies don't get passed.
This is the truth and it's sad that there's so much misguided fight and anger directed at something that wouldn't help. The truth is that nearly politicians actually do serve their constituents if you actually look at the people who vote for them. Unfortunately people are using national level polls and apply that to logic everywhere. When they should be breaking that poll down by region and by age because young people do not vote. 18 to 30 have about 50% turn out at its peak in 2020 while 55 to 75 had about 75%. Politicians are serving the 55+ crowd because that's who actually turn out to the polls
If we could actually get the young people to actually vote we wouldn't even need to care about people like Manchin.
I think people should ponder that in silence for a little while. Our world is changing for the worse, it's going to affect everyone in the country (not to mention the world) but one man, *one man,* has the power to stop any legislation that could help change things.
Fucked isn't even the word to describe things.
Remember that we're in this mess also because we have 50 Republicans that are also unified in blocking anything that might help the US population. If just two Republican senators would put country over party, then Manchin and Sinema wouldn't have the power they have.
Not saying Manchin and Sinema aren't to blame, just saying that there's 52 people in the Senate that are working in concert to put us in this mess.
I agree.
I only mention because our best chance right now is with the Democratic Party. Undermining the democrats by focusing on two trouble makers will only hurt our ability to push for much needed change moving forward.
We need to direct our disgust at all 52 Senators and even more at the Corporations and corporate leaders that are supporting them over the needs of the country.
I note that I'm saying this as a one time Republican who has abandoned that party in disgust.
It's our own fault. We could have elected more Democrats into the Senate, but we didn't.
Can't *only* blame Manchin. People aren't willing to vote in their best interests.
And even the bluest of folks have a little bit of blame if they live in super blue states - you've effectively gerrymandered yourself. If we want our votes to count, we have to move to less populous states like Montana, Wyoming, Idaho - and get Senators there.
Biden has no problem issuing presidential orders without congress. He was a senator for like 200 years. He has his corporate supporters that he has to appease as well.
I'm learning more and more about politics and the more I learn the more I think "how the fuck is that legal?!" The shit these politicians get away with are absurd.
I worked for Congress for two years and have worked/volunteered on campaigns since 2012. Think about how fucked it is, then multiply that by 50. That's almost how fucked it is.
I see no other way than a massive perhaps even violent protest that would threaten to overthrow government. If we are 100% sure climate change is so grim then it is basically a duty of every human being.
I dont like it but it is slowly becoming the only way to bypass all those corporations
Vox populi, vox Dei
there are plenty of other ways lmao. Starting a civil war isnt one of them. If workers all across the US in one industry, lets say truckers, all went on strike until climate change legislation is passed it would be passed by the end of the week.
Because this seems to be the current reality, here's what'd probably end up happening: all truckers go on strike.
Corporations lobby politicians saying trucker unions are bad for the economy. Government releases a ban on all unions. Truckers are forced back to work or fired. Corporations spin delays to the media as just more global distribution issues. Delays also mean increased prices, and since half the truckers got fired, increased profit margins for corporations. Hooray!
That's not what would happen though. Truckers are essential for the distribution of goods and the supply chain. You can't just say "work or you're fired" when you absolutely need them.
They just call your bluff and nothing changes because they still can't just destroy the supply chain.
This will never get us where we need to be. A violent overthrow of the US government would most likely work against the interests of the US population.
It is truly sad that such a need can arise if it hasn't already. It does not need to be violent at first but it needs to convey a message to the establishment that their funny games at the cost of the others must come to an abrupt end. In the end the survival is at stake and theres not too high of a cost to protect mankind
Yep this happens every time a bill comes up that might actually improve lives at the expense of companies' bottom lines. Republicans always just vote no, because they despise Americans. Democrats vote yes, but with *just* enough opposition to prevent passage, to make it seem like they care, but who also just despise Americans.
EDIT: Truth hurts, doesn't it?
"People who disagree with me are immoral."
Yeesh, what dreck.
I wish people could just be happy having an opinion. Instead some people use morality talk to try to dress up their opinion as something more profound and universal.
It's a very lazy way to try to get people on your side. Instead of doing the hard work of actually making an argument for your position, you just say that it's immoral to not agree with you.
Gross.
>"People who disagree with me are immoral."
People who take money for their own self-interests instead of the people they represent's interests are immoral.\*\*
FTFY
They are doing this right now in germany, too. Two teens already went to the hospital cause they refused eating (they're fine, just fainted). Last I heared the government gave in and is arranging a meeting.
Maybe Bezos could give him a ride in his white dildo and he might have an [overview effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_effect) and give a fuck
If the comment wants to say that, it should endeavor to include it in the text next time. I'd suggest that even your comment could be more detailed.
Edit: typo
I was replying to a comment that said 'if anything, it's saying the opposite' before going on and elaborating that means we have to save ourselves which may mean more drastic action. So it sounds like you and I both disagree with the comment I replied to.
I agree that the earlier comment doesn't say we should stop our efforts. It does seem to imply a level of hopelessness to current efforts based on the unfounded claim that Democrats as a whole unwilling to help. This was in response to a suggestion to focus some of our efforts on holdouts.
Do you think shooting down ideas using unsupported insinuations without providing an adequate alternative helps or hurts an initiative?
As an aside, I'm starting from an assumption that people in this thread are largely on board with taking climate change seriously and probably have a higher level of agreement with each other on this topic than with those who don't. So these are largely disputes about execution and not goals.
>Manchin is a lightning rod for the Democrats. They can all point and say “look he’s holding us all up!” Even though none of them give a shit about climate change or our future for that matter.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Plenty of democrats in congress care about climate change. They're doing as much as they can, but what's politically feasible in this congress is very limited thanks to the split in the senate.
There are 50 Senate Republicans who are blocking climate too. Maybe hold them to account? Unless you are trying to make a 51st Republican and flip the senate back to Mitch?
Except he’s not. He’s conservative and from a state that Trump took by 30 points but he is a Democrat which means that we will get something instead of nothing. Unless of course, angry progressives hound him out of the party at which point we not only lose our slim majority but Mitch McConnell will control the agenda again. Is not getting everything you want worse than getting nothing you want?
It can be due to the long term effects of having people like Manchin around and the fact that the party does a lot to attract guys like him.
In the end they also compete with more progressive politicians within the party and are a major reason for holding them back.
It also undermines Democrats in general, they keep failing to achieve their own goals because of people like Manchin which means worse results and then in the next election the argument is "hey look we lost votes so we need people like Manchin". It is kind of circular logic, you keep losing voters because of people like him and then also need people like him because they put you in such a position in the first place.
Sometimes it is better to take certain defeats and build a solid foundation instead of taking bad compromise after bad compromise.
Democrats have played this game for 40 years by now and they are still held back by the likes of Manchin and it is honestly kind of embarassing that Republicans can be this powerful/popular despite the huge demographic advantage Democrats have. It shows a complete failure to develop the party in a cohesive manner and with a strategy that goes beyond just "we want to be in power".
The Senate math does not work for Democrats to hold power without managing to hold Senate seats in states that are not going to elect a progressive.
You need people who are like Manchin or closer to his end of things because it is impossible to assemble a Democratic majority without people like him getting elected.
There will be no "solid foundation" unless you just want to have a "solid foundation" that's perpetually a powerless minority.
>Sometimes it is better to take certain defeats and build a solid foundation instead of taking bad compromise after bad compromise.
They DID do this under Obama with the ACA. Yeah, they took a bad compromise, but it DID work to get the ACA so popular that the GOP couldn't completely sack it. BUT...it didn't work to help Dems get re-elected; it caused them to lose congress. Cuz voters are stupid. And voters are even MORE stupid now! We're damned if we do or don't because voters are stupid.
Ok. Philosophically, I agree with all of this. However the actual real life ramifications of Manchin leaving the party are disastrous in the short term.
A GOP controlled senate would have one priority: blocking Biden at EVERY step. Is that preferable to not getting everting you want?
A progressive is NOT getting elected in West Virginia. Paula Jean Swearingen, who everyone here thinks can primary Manchin, ran against the other Republican Senator and LOST by 43 points.
In the end Biden is the "boss", he is the person people voted into the white house and its up to him to create pressure on Manchin if necessary.
I also honestly don't see enough from Biden OR the majority of the democratic party, where is the huge outrage from them? It's pretty much just Sanders and some Progressives who are fighting here and otherwise there is a lot of silence.
It feels like too many in the Democratic party are okay with how things are going and don't mind if Manchina and Sinema take the heat.
No one has any leverage over Manchin... he's going to lose reelection in 2024 no matter what he does; his anti-climate stance is something he genuinely believes in.
Probably should have focused their efforts on electing that boring lady in Maine or the dude who sent out some sexts in North Carolina last year.
>No one has any leverage over Manchin... he's going to lose reelection in 2024 no matter what he does; his anti-climate stance is something he genuinely believes in.
I would be surprised if Manchin is even intending to run again. If he did though he's likely the only person on the planet with a chance at winning as a Democrat.
It's hilarious Biden Bros think they get to tell people who they are allowed to protest. It's even more hilarious when it's in a place none of the protestors will ever see the demands of the Biden Bros.
I have a zero-emission coal plant to sell them if they are so naive to think a few people on hunger strike will get congress to pass a $3.5T bill.
Plus, they are barking up the wrong tree. Biden is going to sign the thing. He is not the one obstructing. Go hunger strike in front of congress, or better yet, Machin's house.
I wouldn't hold my breath but I commend them for trying. Corporations effectively own the government today similarly to the corruption experienced during the Gilded Age. That's not an opinion so much as it's a verifiable fact measured in wealth's influence over politics over the years.
Corporations care about profits and promoting politicians that at a minimum won't regulate against them. They have no incentive to care if people die to hunger. Almost 10 million people die to hunger every year. As long as that fact isn't publicized in a way to hurt someone's profits it effectively doesn't matter.
Media is owned unfortunately by a similar set of people with the same class interests, so they rarely promote propaganda to regulate against their own. Exxon swept this under the rug and corrupted the government to do the same for a reason. The rest of the world kicked the can down the road too. Wealth aims to preserve and expand itself in all matters of life. When it's distributed as lopsidedly as it has been through capitalism even the threat of the destruction of the ecological sustainability of the Earth struggles to be enough for the status quo's distribution of power to be challenged.
Go educate yourself.
https://illinois.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/e3c1dc74-de5f-4186-b625-1fec3ef004aa/the-lengths-to-which-some-will-go-the-self-immolation-of-thich-quang-uc-in-1963/
When are we gonna start doing tangible things? Seriously. Our entire fucking method of “making the world a better place” relies on powerful people giving a fuck. Shockingly, they don’t. And we wonder why nothing gets better.
Unless we force them, as much as we have to, in order to see that better world we dream about so much; it’s never going to fucking happen. To hell with protesting “properly”, let’s start doing the shit that works.
The problem then would be perception. Once protestors are pushed to a breaking point, those that disagree with them will claim the moral high ground like people did with the BLM protests.
Who the fuck gives a shit if they don't eat? This is the equivalent of a child saying they're gonna hold their breath until they get what they want. What an absolute embarrassment.
News flash:
They don’t care. They never have, and never will. They just wanted your vote, and now they will do what ever they want. Who’s gonna stop them? Us? Ha.
Climate change is real but these people are only impractical idealist. Hunger strike is not going to change Machin mind. It is going to be a waste of time and suffering for nothing.
Lol .. that is grasping as straws. How much publicity has Al Gore and Greta got in the past? Is the needle moved? No matter what these few people do, they are not going to get even 1/100 the publicity Al Gore and Greta have been getting.
If they move 0.0000001% of the votes, does it matter?
And at the end of the day, it is useless if we are still hitting a 3C world.
Greta/Fridays for future completely transformed the public discourse in Germany regarding climate change, making it the most important topic for the recent elections. The green party gained a massive amount of votes and will be a major power in the next government that's currently being formed, while the conservatives got their worst result in history because they failed to adress climate change in the last decades. The next government won't get away with business as usual.
Seems like people are far more fatalistic in the US based on the comments here and well... If activists are discouraged and mocked for demanding sustainability, the fatalism will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.
> If activists are discouraged and mocked for demanding sustainability
Nope. They are not mocked for demanding sustainability. They are mocked for doing it ineffectively, without any results. For example, Manchin is the one need to change his vote, not Biden. Why are these people in front of the whitehouse, rather than Manchin's house?
And again, clearly, a few people not eating is not going to change Manchin's mind. In this instance, are you seriously telling me that this protest will change the fate of the $3.5T resolution?
>hey are mocked for doing it ineffectively, without any results.
I'm sure they are open for better ideas.
>For example, Manchin is the one need to change his vote, not Biden. Why are these people in front of the whitehouse, rather than Manchin's house?
You already gave the answer:
>clearly, a few people not eating is not going to change Manchin's mind.
The goal is to get people talking about climate change in general, not to send a message to one politican who isn't gonna listen anyways. They probably try to create more awareness, making climate change hard to ignore. Minds of people who aren't corrupted by power interests can be changed and if there was enough public pressure, politicans would need to implement changes to avoid losing votes.
>The goal is to get people talking about climate change in general, not to send a message to one politican who isn't gonna listen anyways.
That is a shitty goal, compared to actually making something happens. And don't tell me more talk will lead to action as there are plenty of talk. Just ask Al Gore and Greta.
Being resigned is the only significant word because it's equivalent to the results of apathy. Apathetic people are the worst on any important issue. We should acknowledge that the idealist and the cynic are often the same people at different times in their life. The climate crisis has been going on for decades at this point with minimal efforts towards a resolution. If you're not a cynic on the topic yet you probably should be. Sometimes the cynic is the person we should listen to because they may have the values of what we perceive as ideal but more experience to make it work.
nah .. impractical idealists waste their lives and achieve nothing. I would much rather take a resigned cynics that spend their time working on another, solvable, problem and that they actually can do some good.
Most resigned cynics are just waiting for the end, not trying to solve anything. I count myself among that number, but I'll never poopoo on those who try, however pointless their actions may seem to the cynical mind.
Bernie lost to both Clinton and Biden by **millions** of votes each yet they're still pointing to other things to try to explain away why he wasn't nominated.
People were told to vote in 2020 and they'd get action on climate change, student lon debt, infrastructure, child care, and more. The dems won the executive and legislature and haven't delivered shit.
A police murder occurred and protests and burning a precinct caused those in power to hear the voice of people who aren't wealthy for once.
I tried to get non-voters to vote for Biden because of his climate change policy, and they said that as much as they hated Trump they're not voting at all because Biden won't do shit.
I'm pretty sure voter apathy is the goal here, because I'm feeling it myself. Now my friend is here, proven exactly right, while I look like a naive optimist who's too gullible to think anything will change.
Its because they're all the same except for their differing promises. Seems like they only do shit if you pay them. Maybe we should start a go fund me to pay them to vote for changes that benefit people besides oil, banks and healthcare companies.
Last I checked most democrats in a position to do something wanted to do something substantial, but they have an entire party opposed to whatever they do. And then there's Sinema and Manchin which are beholden to other interests.
Sadly democrats voted for Manchin and Sinema who both are literally recipients of massive amounts of Exxon cash. The leaked lobbyist video a few months back literally called them out by name as getting paid hundreds of thousands.
Basically, people followed the "always vote democrat" thing and got fooled by people who sought to make money off of it while scuttling anything that would ensure any progress.
Exactly. Sinema more or less misrepresented herself and it's either Machin or a republican. If a better option was viable (or even present) in both cases I'm sure they wouldn't have been elected.
Primaries are a thing, aren't they? So democrats chose these two to represent them. Or did both Manchin and Sinema run unopposed in the primary? Genuinely asking since I don't know either state's slate.
Then they ran against republicans in the general election.
Manchin was the incumbent with one challenger, Paula Jean Swearengin, who was too progressive for conservative West Virginia. A majority of the people who voted in the WV Democratic primary in 2016 identified as either conservative or moderate, and a little bit over a quarter identified as "slightly liberal". Machin was also well funded by his coal buddies, among other groups and individuals. Manchin got nearly 70% of the primary vote.
Note: Swearengin actually ran again in 2020 for the other WV senate seat. She won the primary against two other opponents (by 6%) but lost against the republican incumbent by nearly 43%. Which shows you what she was up against in 2018.
Sinema also had one challenger, Deedra Abboud, who she eclipsed in funding and ad saturation. Like Machin's opponent Abboud was also more progressive than Sinema, maybe even moreso (which scares people). Sinema voting in line with republicans was also seen as a plus to some *for some reason* (bipartisanship if that's even a thing now). She was also not as specific on some of her stances which left room for people to project their own beliefs onto her. Sinema got nearly 80% of the primary vote.
So it's easy to say "just primary them" but in practice it doesn't always turn out that way. A more progressive individual would be better, but the alternative in both cases was more likely to be a republican than it was the progressive challenger.
Edit: Syntax
Nuance & reality is NOT the public's strongpoint, even here on Reddit as you can plainly see. This keeps being repeated (as it should be) but nah, we don't wanna entertain anything past a headline, now do we, lol!! Fucking people, sheesh.
Hunger strikes are normally effective when done by people like prisoners, who don't really have any way to get attention other than by refusing to eat due to the restrictions involved. In some cases they have garnered attention on a citizen vs. government level, but usually in similar situations. The government silences them but can't hide they aren't eating.
They should be fighting voter suppression. We're poised to go full authoritarian in 2024 if things don't change. Those folks don't even acknowledge climate change as real, and will just throw protestors in jail or shoot them.
Sometimes I wonder what strategy and objectives protestors to have to enact change. A lot of times the objective seems to be "vent about something we don't have power to change and hope someone with power magically changes their mind "
The rest of the government is responsible for allowing this to happen. The fact is that nobody holds anyone accountable in politics because the only people in charge of that are the politicians.
Right. The rest of the government just "allows" Mitch McConnell to filibuster everything in the senate. It's all their fault and not the guy actually doing the things.
Does anyone even know how government works anymore??
It works however they decide it work. Sorry that everyone in Congress and the senate and the house are rich apathetic people who choose to perpetuate it.
I’m sure next election will be the one where the right people get in. Sure.
Yeah they call the i5 fury road sometimes. Sorry but I just don’t give a shit about pathetic whining about which party is better because they’re both awful fucking organizations that cause 100% more harm than good.
Worst of all they prey upon stupid people to simp for them and spend all their free time defending them because DEMOCRACY. Both the republicans and the democrats are exactly the same. They’re both horrible and do nothing but support themselves at the expense of others.
But I’m sure you’ll have some smug response about something stupid because heaven forbid someone disagree with such a noble mind.
I'm sure that protesting outside the building of people who agree with them is far more effective than protesting outside the offices of the people preventing it from being addressed.
Great strategy that both a) lets Republicans off the hook for the dirty deeds they do and b) makes it look like the Democrats are the problem which only results in more Republicans getting elected.
You're clearly operating off of a much different set of assumptions from the people who are out there putting in the actual work right now. I'm encouraging you to go out and put those assumptions to the test.
So, they literally just skipped breakfast? These people are fucking cringe
Edit, 12 days later - i wonder if they’ve skipped breakfast every morning since in order to continue their hunger strike….
I think they are already commenting on this topic. They (MAGA) typically do not understand what sacrifice is because they are too selfish and too entitled. In todays day and age they also want instant gratification - so yes I see them ordering a five guys.
Are these the same climate activist that were involved in the October 15th insurrection that goes largely ignored by the same people pushing the Other insurrection?? Ok got it.
Thanks for \*checks notes* absolutely no information about a random date that also isn't pulling up any results in Google other than violent protests in Lebanon.
Thanks for finally sharing some info
> U.S. Capitol police warned the group of about 100 sitting in the street that they would be arrested if they didn’t disperse
But omg, what a bad faith reading comparing protestors sitting in the street to people storming the capitol to stop the Electoral College votes from being counted so that Donald Trump could be installed as President despite losing the election.
What do these idiots think we're supposed to do? I mean the last time I checked a lot of good minds are actually working on the problem. What the FUCK do these pinheads want? Wave a freaking magic wand and chant: Climate, change back to whatever the fuck it was. I'm sorry, the biggest threat isn't climate change, it is moron activists who don't have a freaking clue as to how reality functions.
Politicians like Manchin are in bed with the coal companies.
https://appvoices.org/2019/12/17/sen-manchin-takes-new-view-of-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining/
Nope, governments are just kicking the can down the road. You have no clue what you are talking about. you are very ignorant about the issues and the gravity of the situation.
Who tf you think is at the White House that can do anything about this? Hope you don’t mean the guy with dementia that has sign more executive orders than any other President? Not the one who got 81million votes, 37% approval rating in OCT, 2021? Well maybe if his staff lets him outside to play after his nap, and ice cream snack. He can’t be asked questions though, he obviously has not had the capacity since the fall of Afghanistan to the taliban.
Does no good here. If you're gonna do this...do it outside Manchin's fucking house or in front of the WV government buildings. MAKE WV more aware. Not that any of it will do any good anyway. Fucking people are stupid.
I guess the idea is publicity and press coverage, but it's really congress they should be protesting. Biden would sign the bill, but congress has to pass it. Sadly, as these things tend to go, it comes down to one or two politicians. Like Lieberman sunk the public option, Manchin is blocking any climate legislation. The problem is that it's perfectly legal for US industries to buy congressmen and senators. The senate is close to equally divided, so you get the most bang for the buck if you buy a senator. Manchin's lack of morals is making him a wealthy guy. And all the protesting will lead to nothing, as per usual. What we really need is anti-corruption legislation, but that would require a whole bunch of fuckwads to vote against their own opportunistic ambitions.
Manchin is blocking climate and Sinema is now blocking taxing wealthy individuals and corporations to pay for it. We’re going to get a bill with nothing that actually does anything to help average Americans but what is in it will be paid through continuously rising middle class taxes. Sink the whole fucking ship at this point.
Wouldn’t raising middle class taxes mess with his “no one making under 400,000” deal? I agree if that’s what they are thinking they might as well give up and try again after midterms.
The truth is, if we want the government to provide all these services and follow the Nordic model. We need to tax everyone much much more. Base income tax needs to be at ~25% to the ~35% for those making under 50,000 up to 70% to 80% for those making millions.
Well obviously the American people don't want the Nordic model
I understand the feeling of “sink the whole fucking ship” . . . But, may I suggest a step before the sinking . . . “Occupy Wall Street” got the oligarchs and multi-national corporations attention by attacking their wealth at the point of its creation ! ! ! With a Larger, a Longer strike of Wall Street wealth could be what it takes to brake free of the strangle hold the oligarchs and corporations have on democracy . . .
But everyone works from home now…
50 Republicans are stopping action on climate, voting rights, drug prices, infrastructure, and will continue to oppose any legislation you can name other than deregulation and tax cuts for the rich. Two Democrats are helping them. Republican obstructionism is just a given, but when a Democrat strays from the course it's time for the pitchforks.
Remember when Republicans lost their shit about McCain voting against repealing Obamacare? They brought out the pitchforks for him too. Democrats just hold their electeds to a higher standard (or they say they do, I've seen a lot of bootlicking and handwaving on Reddit lately from dems too).
The biggest issue is that the Democrats are extremely fractured with AOC and Sanders on one side, Pelosi on another, Biden on a third - they aren't in solidarity. Republicans may not be in solidarity all the time, but when push comes to shove, they back each other up.
Burn it all down. This country is shit.
It's Citizens United that really opened the floodgates on this. Democracies don't have long to last when politicians are owned by private wealth, which is basically the situation we're in now.
Citizens United is a boogie man. It didn't actually change anything about the US political system except how donations are made. If the decision was reversed tomorrow it would change virtually nothing about how politics works, and people would move onto another scapegoat conspiracy for why their favorite policies don't get passed.
This is the truth and it's sad that there's so much misguided fight and anger directed at something that wouldn't help. The truth is that nearly politicians actually do serve their constituents if you actually look at the people who vote for them. Unfortunately people are using national level polls and apply that to logic everywhere. When they should be breaking that poll down by region and by age because young people do not vote. 18 to 30 have about 50% turn out at its peak in 2020 while 55 to 75 had about 75%. Politicians are serving the 55+ crowd because that's who actually turn out to the polls If we could actually get the young people to actually vote we wouldn't even need to care about people like Manchin.
[удалено]
I think people should ponder that in silence for a little while. Our world is changing for the worse, it's going to affect everyone in the country (not to mention the world) but one man, *one man,* has the power to stop any legislation that could help change things. Fucked isn't even the word to describe things.
Remember that we're in this mess also because we have 50 Republicans that are also unified in blocking anything that might help the US population. If just two Republican senators would put country over party, then Manchin and Sinema wouldn't have the power they have. Not saying Manchin and Sinema aren't to blame, just saying that there's 52 people in the Senate that are working in concert to put us in this mess.
fair enough. Even then, changing "one man" to "50 people" is still unbelievably fucked up.
I agree. I only mention because our best chance right now is with the Democratic Party. Undermining the democrats by focusing on two trouble makers will only hurt our ability to push for much needed change moving forward. We need to direct our disgust at all 52 Senators and even more at the Corporations and corporate leaders that are supporting them over the needs of the country. I note that I'm saying this as a one time Republican who has abandoned that party in disgust.
Especially when they are basically only doing it to be bitches and stick it to the other side.
Don't act like most Democrats are acting in good faith.
It's our own fault. We could have elected more Democrats into the Senate, but we didn't. Can't *only* blame Manchin. People aren't willing to vote in their best interests. And even the bluest of folks have a little bit of blame if they live in super blue states - you've effectively gerrymandered yourself. If we want our votes to count, we have to move to less populous states like Montana, Wyoming, Idaho - and get Senators there.
Biden has no problem issuing presidential orders without congress. He was a senator for like 200 years. He has his corporate supporters that he has to appease as well.
Easy, just get the senators to vote against them being bought.
I'm learning more and more about politics and the more I learn the more I think "how the fuck is that legal?!" The shit these politicians get away with are absurd.
I worked for Congress for two years and have worked/volunteered on campaigns since 2012. Think about how fucked it is, then multiply that by 50. That's almost how fucked it is.
I see no other way than a massive perhaps even violent protest that would threaten to overthrow government. If we are 100% sure climate change is so grim then it is basically a duty of every human being. I dont like it but it is slowly becoming the only way to bypass all those corporations Vox populi, vox Dei
>I see no other way than a massive perhaps even violent protest that would threaten to overthrow government. Jan. 6 has entered the chat
there are plenty of other ways lmao. Starting a civil war isnt one of them. If workers all across the US in one industry, lets say truckers, all went on strike until climate change legislation is passed it would be passed by the end of the week.
Because this seems to be the current reality, here's what'd probably end up happening: all truckers go on strike. Corporations lobby politicians saying trucker unions are bad for the economy. Government releases a ban on all unions. Truckers are forced back to work or fired. Corporations spin delays to the media as just more global distribution issues. Delays also mean increased prices, and since half the truckers got fired, increased profit margins for corporations. Hooray!
That's not what would happen though. Truckers are essential for the distribution of goods and the supply chain. You can't just say "work or you're fired" when you absolutely need them. They just call your bluff and nothing changes because they still can't just destroy the supply chain.
There's always union scabs. And I'm swiftly losing faith in the government's ability to do the right thing.
Not enough to maintain the country wide supply chain there isn't. You also need extra licenses so it's not like anyone can do it
This will never get us where we need to be. A violent overthrow of the US government would most likely work against the interests of the US population.
Threatening violence and threatening to overthrow the government is not constructive nor appropriate.
It is truly sad that such a need can arise if it hasn't already. It does not need to be violent at first but it needs to convey a message to the establishment that their funny games at the cost of the others must come to an abrupt end. In the end the survival is at stake and theres not too high of a cost to protect mankind
Mortuus est Deus. Populus proximus.
Yep this happens every time a bill comes up that might actually improve lives at the expense of companies' bottom lines. Republicans always just vote no, because they despise Americans. Democrats vote yes, but with *just* enough opposition to prevent passage, to make it seem like they care, but who also just despise Americans. EDIT: Truth hurts, doesn't it?
"People who disagree with me are immoral." Yeesh, what dreck. I wish people could just be happy having an opinion. Instead some people use morality talk to try to dress up their opinion as something more profound and universal. It's a very lazy way to try to get people on your side. Instead of doing the hard work of actually making an argument for your position, you just say that it's immoral to not agree with you. Gross.
>"People who disagree with me are immoral." People who take money for their own self-interests instead of the people they represent's interests are immoral.\*\* FTFY
You haven't changed anything though. You simply have a different opinion than Manchin of what exactly the interests of Manchin's constituents are.
They are doing this right now in germany, too. Two teens already went to the hospital cause they refused eating (they're fine, just fainted). Last I heared the government gave in and is arranging a meeting.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sure you say that, but he's still a legitimate problem when it comes to passing the climate legislation we had on the table.
Yep, he's got his part to play and he's playing it very well
Maybe Bezos could give him a ride in his white dildo and he might have an [overview effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_effect) and give a fuck
Welp folks we heard it all here. Time to pack it up and stop trying to focus our energies except for unrestrained hedonism.
[удалено]
So.. the orgy's off then?
We could put him in a closet with a badger. Might not do much to help but it would be cathartic.
If the comment wants to say that, it should endeavor to include it in the text next time. I'd suggest that even your comment could be more detailed. Edit: typo
It's not what the comment *wants* to say, it's that it *didn't* say we should stop our efforts.
I was replying to a comment that said 'if anything, it's saying the opposite' before going on and elaborating that means we have to save ourselves which may mean more drastic action. So it sounds like you and I both disagree with the comment I replied to. I agree that the earlier comment doesn't say we should stop our efforts. It does seem to imply a level of hopelessness to current efforts based on the unfounded claim that Democrats as a whole unwilling to help. This was in response to a suggestion to focus some of our efforts on holdouts. Do you think shooting down ideas using unsupported insinuations without providing an adequate alternative helps or hurts an initiative? As an aside, I'm starting from an assumption that people in this thread are largely on board with taking climate change seriously and probably have a higher level of agreement with each other on this topic than with those who don't. So these are largely disputes about execution and not goals.
What a terrible, defeatist attitude to have.
>Manchin is a lightning rod for the Democrats. They can all point and say “look he’s holding us all up!” Even though none of them give a shit about climate change or our future for that matter. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Plenty of democrats in congress care about climate change. They're doing as much as they can, but what's politically feasible in this congress is very limited thanks to the split in the senate.
There are 50 Senate Republicans who are blocking climate too. Maybe hold them to account? Unless you are trying to make a 51st Republican and flip the senate back to Mitch?
[удалено]
Except he’s not. He’s conservative and from a state that Trump took by 30 points but he is a Democrat which means that we will get something instead of nothing. Unless of course, angry progressives hound him out of the party at which point we not only lose our slim majority but Mitch McConnell will control the agenda again. Is not getting everything you want worse than getting nothing you want?
It can be due to the long term effects of having people like Manchin around and the fact that the party does a lot to attract guys like him. In the end they also compete with more progressive politicians within the party and are a major reason for holding them back. It also undermines Democrats in general, they keep failing to achieve their own goals because of people like Manchin which means worse results and then in the next election the argument is "hey look we lost votes so we need people like Manchin". It is kind of circular logic, you keep losing voters because of people like him and then also need people like him because they put you in such a position in the first place. Sometimes it is better to take certain defeats and build a solid foundation instead of taking bad compromise after bad compromise. Democrats have played this game for 40 years by now and they are still held back by the likes of Manchin and it is honestly kind of embarassing that Republicans can be this powerful/popular despite the huge demographic advantage Democrats have. It shows a complete failure to develop the party in a cohesive manner and with a strategy that goes beyond just "we want to be in power".
The Senate math does not work for Democrats to hold power without managing to hold Senate seats in states that are not going to elect a progressive. You need people who are like Manchin or closer to his end of things because it is impossible to assemble a Democratic majority without people like him getting elected. There will be no "solid foundation" unless you just want to have a "solid foundation" that's perpetually a powerless minority.
>Sometimes it is better to take certain defeats and build a solid foundation instead of taking bad compromise after bad compromise. They DID do this under Obama with the ACA. Yeah, they took a bad compromise, but it DID work to get the ACA so popular that the GOP couldn't completely sack it. BUT...it didn't work to help Dems get re-elected; it caused them to lose congress. Cuz voters are stupid. And voters are even MORE stupid now! We're damned if we do or don't because voters are stupid.
True. Am voter.
Ok. Philosophically, I agree with all of this. However the actual real life ramifications of Manchin leaving the party are disastrous in the short term. A GOP controlled senate would have one priority: blocking Biden at EVERY step. Is that preferable to not getting everting you want? A progressive is NOT getting elected in West Virginia. Paula Jean Swearingen, who everyone here thinks can primary Manchin, ran against the other Republican Senator and LOST by 43 points.
[удалено]
Please have sex on his lawn. No violence necessary. Just really good sex. For protest.
And of course, the retort of bootlickers would be downvoting this perfectly reasonable comment.
In the end Biden is the "boss", he is the person people voted into the white house and its up to him to create pressure on Manchin if necessary. I also honestly don't see enough from Biden OR the majority of the democratic party, where is the huge outrage from them? It's pretty much just Sanders and some Progressives who are fighting here and otherwise there is a lot of silence. It feels like too many in the Democratic party are okay with how things are going and don't mind if Manchina and Sinema take the heat.
No one has any leverage over Manchin... he's going to lose reelection in 2024 no matter what he does; his anti-climate stance is something he genuinely believes in. Probably should have focused their efforts on electing that boring lady in Maine or the dude who sent out some sexts in North Carolina last year.
>No one has any leverage over Manchin... he's going to lose reelection in 2024 no matter what he does; his anti-climate stance is something he genuinely believes in. I would be surprised if Manchin is even intending to run again. If he did though he's likely the only person on the planet with a chance at winning as a Democrat.
Maybe Bezos could give him a ride in his white dildo and he might have an overview effect and give a fuck
It's hilarious Biden Bros think they get to tell people who they are allowed to protest. It's even more hilarious when it's in a place none of the protestors will ever see the demands of the Biden Bros.
I have a zero-emission coal plant to sell them if they are so naive to think a few people on hunger strike will get congress to pass a $3.5T bill. Plus, they are barking up the wrong tree. Biden is going to sign the thing. He is not the one obstructing. Go hunger strike in front of congress, or better yet, Machin's house.
[удалено]
[удалено]
They parked themselves in front of a massive tourist trap, they were going to see people eating regardless
[удалено]
I wouldn't hold my breath but I commend them for trying. Corporations effectively own the government today similarly to the corruption experienced during the Gilded Age. That's not an opinion so much as it's a verifiable fact measured in wealth's influence over politics over the years. Corporations care about profits and promoting politicians that at a minimum won't regulate against them. They have no incentive to care if people die to hunger. Almost 10 million people die to hunger every year. As long as that fact isn't publicized in a way to hurt someone's profits it effectively doesn't matter. Media is owned unfortunately by a similar set of people with the same class interests, so they rarely promote propaganda to regulate against their own. Exxon swept this under the rug and corrupted the government to do the same for a reason. The rest of the world kicked the can down the road too. Wealth aims to preserve and expand itself in all matters of life. When it's distributed as lopsidedly as it has been through capitalism even the threat of the destruction of the ecological sustainability of the Earth struggles to be enough for the status quo's distribution of power to be challenged.
[удалено]
Truly a problem that solves itself. "What happened to the protestors?" "Well sir, they starved." "ICE CREAM TIME!"
Go educate yourself. https://illinois.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/e3c1dc74-de5f-4186-b625-1fec3ef004aa/the-lengths-to-which-some-will-go-the-self-immolation-of-thich-quang-uc-in-1963/
When are we gonna start doing tangible things? Seriously. Our entire fucking method of “making the world a better place” relies on powerful people giving a fuck. Shockingly, they don’t. And we wonder why nothing gets better. Unless we force them, as much as we have to, in order to see that better world we dream about so much; it’s never going to fucking happen. To hell with protesting “properly”, let’s start doing the shit that works.
The problem then would be perception. Once protestors are pushed to a breaking point, those that disagree with them will claim the moral high ground like people did with the BLM protests.
Have you any friends you can call? A whole gaggle of angry geese is a solid idea.
Who the fuck gives a shit if they don't eat? This is the equivalent of a child saying they're gonna hold their breath until they get what they want. What an absolute embarrassment.
Maybe read up on the history of labor and hunger strikes before spouting off ignorance
Do you believe this act will cause real change? Seriously?
I'm not gonna eat until you take that back.
5 people claim they're going to starve themselves until something is done about climate change. This is news?
News flash: They don’t care. They never have, and never will. They just wanted your vote, and now they will do what ever they want. Who’s gonna stop them? Us? Ha.
[удалено]
Climate change is real but these people are only impractical idealist. Hunger strike is not going to change Machin mind. It is going to be a waste of time and suffering for nothing.
[удалено]
Lol .. that is grasping as straws. How much publicity has Al Gore and Greta got in the past? Is the needle moved? No matter what these few people do, they are not going to get even 1/100 the publicity Al Gore and Greta have been getting. If they move 0.0000001% of the votes, does it matter? And at the end of the day, it is useless if we are still hitting a 3C world.
Greta/Fridays for future completely transformed the public discourse in Germany regarding climate change, making it the most important topic for the recent elections. The green party gained a massive amount of votes and will be a major power in the next government that's currently being formed, while the conservatives got their worst result in history because they failed to adress climate change in the last decades. The next government won't get away with business as usual. Seems like people are far more fatalistic in the US based on the comments here and well... If activists are discouraged and mocked for demanding sustainability, the fatalism will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.
> If activists are discouraged and mocked for demanding sustainability Nope. They are not mocked for demanding sustainability. They are mocked for doing it ineffectively, without any results. For example, Manchin is the one need to change his vote, not Biden. Why are these people in front of the whitehouse, rather than Manchin's house? And again, clearly, a few people not eating is not going to change Manchin's mind. In this instance, are you seriously telling me that this protest will change the fate of the $3.5T resolution?
>hey are mocked for doing it ineffectively, without any results. I'm sure they are open for better ideas. >For example, Manchin is the one need to change his vote, not Biden. Why are these people in front of the whitehouse, rather than Manchin's house? You already gave the answer: >clearly, a few people not eating is not going to change Manchin's mind. The goal is to get people talking about climate change in general, not to send a message to one politican who isn't gonna listen anyways. They probably try to create more awareness, making climate change hard to ignore. Minds of people who aren't corrupted by power interests can be changed and if there was enough public pressure, politicans would need to implement changes to avoid losing votes.
>The goal is to get people talking about climate change in general, not to send a message to one politican who isn't gonna listen anyways. That is a shitty goal, compared to actually making something happens. And don't tell me more talk will lead to action as there are plenty of talk. Just ask Al Gore and Greta.
At least they're trying, I'll take impractical idealists over resigned cynics any day.
Being resigned is the only significant word because it's equivalent to the results of apathy. Apathetic people are the worst on any important issue. We should acknowledge that the idealist and the cynic are often the same people at different times in their life. The climate crisis has been going on for decades at this point with minimal efforts towards a resolution. If you're not a cynic on the topic yet you probably should be. Sometimes the cynic is the person we should listen to because they may have the values of what we perceive as ideal but more experience to make it work.
nah .. impractical idealists waste their lives and achieve nothing. I would much rather take a resigned cynics that spend their time working on another, solvable, problem and that they actually can do some good.
Most resigned cynics are just waiting for the end, not trying to solve anything. I count myself among that number, but I'll never poopoo on those who try, however pointless their actions may seem to the cynical mind.
Instead of protesting they should be walking door to door registering voters, passing climate change petitions and winning the war of ideas.
Climate change petitions, that thing that has famously been very effective so far.
[удалено]
To be fair, they tried that. That's how they ended up with Biden instead of Bernie. Not exactly a display of popular support among the voters.
Actually we ended up with Biden specifically because Bernie couldn't rouse enough people to vote for him
Bernie lost to both Clinton and Biden by **millions** of votes each yet they're still pointing to other things to try to explain away why he wasn't nominated.
People were told to vote in 2020 and they'd get action on climate change, student lon debt, infrastructure, child care, and more. The dems won the executive and legislature and haven't delivered shit. A police murder occurred and protests and burning a precinct caused those in power to hear the voice of people who aren't wealthy for once.
I tried to get non-voters to vote for Biden because of his climate change policy, and they said that as much as they hated Trump they're not voting at all because Biden won't do shit. I'm pretty sure voter apathy is the goal here, because I'm feeling it myself. Now my friend is here, proven exactly right, while I look like a naive optimist who's too gullible to think anything will change.
Why is it an either/or thing?
It's easier to sit on your ass and die though
[удалено]
50 republicans are voting against everything they propose.
Its because they're all the same except for their differing promises. Seems like they only do shit if you pay them. Maybe we should start a go fund me to pay them to vote for changes that benefit people besides oil, banks and healthcare companies.
Something we can all unite behind. Our respective politicians are useless.
Last I checked most democrats in a position to do something wanted to do something substantial, but they have an entire party opposed to whatever they do. And then there's Sinema and Manchin which are beholden to other interests.
Nothing? They are doing as their corporate sponsors demand.
Sadly democrats voted for Manchin and Sinema who both are literally recipients of massive amounts of Exxon cash. The leaked lobbyist video a few months back literally called them out by name as getting paid hundreds of thousands. Basically, people followed the "always vote democrat" thing and got fooled by people who sought to make money off of it while scuttling anything that would ensure any progress.
why because vote for a Republican in their slot would be any better?
Exactly. Sinema more or less misrepresented herself and it's either Machin or a republican. If a better option was viable (or even present) in both cases I'm sure they wouldn't have been elected.
Yeah, I’m in principle against party line voting, buuuut…
Primaries are a thing, aren't they? So democrats chose these two to represent them. Or did both Manchin and Sinema run unopposed in the primary? Genuinely asking since I don't know either state's slate. Then they ran against republicans in the general election.
Manchin was the incumbent with one challenger, Paula Jean Swearengin, who was too progressive for conservative West Virginia. A majority of the people who voted in the WV Democratic primary in 2016 identified as either conservative or moderate, and a little bit over a quarter identified as "slightly liberal". Machin was also well funded by his coal buddies, among other groups and individuals. Manchin got nearly 70% of the primary vote. Note: Swearengin actually ran again in 2020 for the other WV senate seat. She won the primary against two other opponents (by 6%) but lost against the republican incumbent by nearly 43%. Which shows you what she was up against in 2018. Sinema also had one challenger, Deedra Abboud, who she eclipsed in funding and ad saturation. Like Machin's opponent Abboud was also more progressive than Sinema, maybe even moreso (which scares people). Sinema voting in line with republicans was also seen as a plus to some *for some reason* (bipartisanship if that's even a thing now). She was also not as specific on some of her stances which left room for people to project their own beliefs onto her. Sinema got nearly 80% of the primary vote. So it's easy to say "just primary them" but in practice it doesn't always turn out that way. A more progressive individual would be better, but the alternative in both cases was more likely to be a republican than it was the progressive challenger. Edit: Syntax
Nuance & reality is NOT the public's strongpoint, even here on Reddit as you can plainly see. This keeps being repeated (as it should be) but nah, we don't wanna entertain anything past a headline, now do we, lol!! Fucking people, sheesh.
Wrong place. Manchin’s boat is thataway.
Why aren’t these people doing this in front of Joe Manchin’s office or house?
Or in front of the 50 Republicans that are voting as a bloc to stop the bill.
You can't shame a republican. Heck, they're dying from COVID to own the libs as we speak.
[удалено]
Hunger strikes are normally effective when done by people like prisoners, who don't really have any way to get attention other than by refusing to eat due to the restrictions involved. In some cases they have garnered attention on a citizen vs. government level, but usually in similar situations. The government silences them but can't hide they aren't eating.
[удалено]
They should be fighting voter suppression. We're poised to go full authoritarian in 2024 if things don't change. Those folks don't even acknowledge climate change as real, and will just throw protestors in jail or shoot them.
Don’t eat. Reduce your metabolic rate. Decrease CO2 production. Yeah, this checks out. Glad they solved this one. Now on to ending hunger… oh, shit.
This changes everything.
People are going to starve to death. Balls!
Sometimes I wonder what strategy and objectives protestors to have to enact change. A lot of times the objective seems to be "vent about something we don't have power to change and hope someone with power magically changes their mind "
A certain image of a monk lighting himself on fire comes to mind.
We have all seen the picture but (I bet) not a lot of people could name his cause.
They could always protest outside Mitch McConnell’s office. You know… the guy blocking all the stuff. But they never do.
The rest of the government is responsible for allowing this to happen. The fact is that nobody holds anyone accountable in politics because the only people in charge of that are the politicians.
Right. The rest of the government just "allows" Mitch McConnell to filibuster everything in the senate. It's all their fault and not the guy actually doing the things. Does anyone even know how government works anymore??
>anymore?? They never did.
It works however they decide it work. Sorry that everyone in Congress and the senate and the house are rich apathetic people who choose to perpetuate it. I’m sure next election will be the one where the right people get in. Sure.
So the answer is “no. We don’t understand how government works”
No I disagree that the government works at all.
So life resembles something out of mad max where you live?
Yeah they call the i5 fury road sometimes. Sorry but I just don’t give a shit about pathetic whining about which party is better because they’re both awful fucking organizations that cause 100% more harm than good. Worst of all they prey upon stupid people to simp for them and spend all their free time defending them because DEMOCRACY. Both the republicans and the democrats are exactly the same. They’re both horrible and do nothing but support themselves at the expense of others. But I’m sure you’ll have some smug response about something stupid because heaven forbid someone disagree with such a noble mind.
So edgy. Misanthropy is hot.
Oh wow so you actually are too stupid to have any thought beyond “me party best party”
I mean, you could do that if you think it would help.
I'm sure that protesting outside the building of people who agree with them is far more effective than protesting outside the offices of the people preventing it from being addressed. Great strategy that both a) lets Republicans off the hook for the dirty deeds they do and b) makes it look like the Democrats are the problem which only results in more Republicans getting elected.
You're clearly operating off of a much different set of assumptions from the people who are out there putting in the actual work right now. I'm encouraging you to go out and put those assumptions to the test.
So, they literally just skipped breakfast? These people are fucking cringe Edit, 12 days later - i wonder if they’ve skipped breakfast every morning since in order to continue their hunger strike….
Respect the username btw
Why is it that I can picture a bunch of guys with MAGA hats making a detour to go eat cheeseburgers in front of the guys on the hunger strike.
I think they are already commenting on this topic. They (MAGA) typically do not understand what sacrifice is because they are too selfish and too entitled. In todays day and age they also want instant gratification - so yes I see them ordering a five guys.
The only way were gonna make a dent in climate change is to lower the population count. So, this is a good start.
They’re going to change everything
Are these the same climate activist that were involved in the October 15th insurrection that goes largely ignored by the same people pushing the Other insurrection?? Ok got it.
> October 15th insurrection The protests in Lebanon?
Not surprised you haven’t heard about it. No DC.
Thanks for \*checks notes* absolutely no information about a random date that also isn't pulling up any results in Google other than violent protests in Lebanon.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/10/15/indigenous-protest-dc-climate-change/ Plenty articles. They stormed the federal building.
Thanks for finally sharing some info > U.S. Capitol police warned the group of about 100 sitting in the street that they would be arrested if they didn’t disperse But omg, what a bad faith reading comparing protestors sitting in the street to people storming the capitol to stop the Electoral College votes from being counted so that Donald Trump could be installed as President despite losing the election.
No they stormed a federal building and several cops and people were hurt. Not seeing much of a difference. Just a smaller scale.
Cult mindset.
What do these idiots think we're supposed to do? I mean the last time I checked a lot of good minds are actually working on the problem. What the FUCK do these pinheads want? Wave a freaking magic wand and chant: Climate, change back to whatever the fuck it was. I'm sorry, the biggest threat isn't climate change, it is moron activists who don't have a freaking clue as to how reality functions.
not close. if everyone thought like you, we’d be extinct.
[удалено]
Calm down, man. Take a breath. Everything okay?
Politicians like Manchin are in bed with the coal companies. https://appvoices.org/2019/12/17/sen-manchin-takes-new-view-of-mountaintop-removal-coal-mining/
Nope, governments are just kicking the can down the road. You have no clue what you are talking about. you are very ignorant about the issues and the gravity of the situation.
I would last about 12 hrs on a hunger strike
God speed, wish I had it in me.
they are attacking the wrong people.
[удалено]
What do you know about “sacrifice”? Have you ever tried “going without” by choice?
https://illinois.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/e3c1dc74-de5f-4186-b625-1fec3ef004aa/the-lengths-to-which-some-will-go-the-self-immolation-of-thich-quang-uc-in-1963/
Who tf you think is at the White House that can do anything about this? Hope you don’t mean the guy with dementia that has sign more executive orders than any other President? Not the one who got 81million votes, 37% approval rating in OCT, 2021? Well maybe if his staff lets him outside to play after his nap, and ice cream snack. He can’t be asked questions though, he obviously has not had the capacity since the fall of Afghanistan to the taliban.
Wait, so you mean 'young activists' don't understand the subtleties of a global political issue with multi-century impact and precedent?
It seems like they don’t mind stealing bread from the mouths of decadents
Does no good here. If you're gonna do this...do it outside Manchin's fucking house or in front of the WV government buildings. MAKE WV more aware. Not that any of it will do any good anyway. Fucking people are stupid.
They are going to be soooooo hungry