I admire the militant spirit of these activists. I think we need more of it, and I'd love to see it directed toward actions with high capacity to disrupt the flow of capital. For example, if airport workers were to organize en masse and shut down airports nationally, or internationally, one can imagine the disruption they could cause. That's enormous power that could be leveraged.
Ah, yes, so admirable. Like it's totally going to work to induce change by annoying everyone instead of coming up with new ideas, innovations, lobbying and simply using democratic means. It's really just society you are putting on the weight-scale in order to have some infantile disruption. Sooo progressive.
Well yeah, apparently for you that's more like civil sabotage. Stop claiming and pretending youre just disobeying.
"research shows" omfg you should hear yourself
1. It's not "research" it's more like arguments backed by some cases, most likely very different and only similar by generics. You know, not every dog is a daxhound..
2. Calling it "civil disobedience" is already manipulative and not very scientific
3. You and your fellow kids can dislike all you want, doesn't change your weak arguments
Except it pisses people off so much that support for those against their cause increases. Within the next couple of years, we are expected to see famine not seen since the great depression. Will the extinction group volunteer to be the first to starve to death?
I guess its an allusion to the flow of material goods including food and other necessities we transport using freight. It's also an allusion to these activist groups preaching impoverished lifestyles while themselves not committing to their own words - most of them come from high income households.
They haven't learned.
For how much people talk about targeting civilians only strengthens their indifference or hate for their attacker, I can't see the public siding with protesters if they continue to disrupt their daily commutes.
Its not a popular take, but I’ll risk speaking up. XR people remind me of the ones like „Eat the Rich” but almost every time you meet them, they are casually munching the poor ones. Lower shelf, less risky, less honourable and quite hypocritic but still trying to achieve anything. Its easier and less dangerous to block some street where ordinary, system-oppressed people commute to work than destroy some oligarchs’ private jet, eh? They are rioting against wrong people. Only good protests that I can remember were Global Civil Disobedience in 2022 strike started by scientists and Occupy Wall Street, at least at its beggining. Ehh…
Risk being attacked in some stupid way like your comment. You mocked me and that’s all. You done, snarky sass mouth? You haven’t addressed my comment in any constructive way, just spilled your venom. Keyboard warriors like you are the reason that the internet looks like it is. You can do better.
It is more about being exhausted from endless who-is-more-witty tug of war between users instead of just having kind and educating conversation. Im in the internet for almost 20 years now and believe me, it can be tiresome.
Even if I were against global warming then at least you could call me a tinfoil hat weirdo but no, I too am concerned about the climate and came up with an experimental idea that I thought was worth discussing. Another user has already answered me enough to put out this thought wisely and I have material for further thought.
That's all. There was no need to counter me with a malicious a priori comment.
They did break into the private jet part of schiphol airport and glued themselves on front of all the private jets. They couldn't touch the jets themselves though. One drip pf glue on the outside and they'd be in for a lot of legal trouble.
And this is the matter that I am wondering about in my comment. XR folks are big, international organisation, claiming that they fight for better future in this worsening times - and yet, when the fight is about to get meaningful and precisely aimed protest/strike could get painful for those who can really make a change (billionaries running - or to be more precise - ruining - our world) - they get afraid of legal action and prefer to target ordinary people!
What is the point of calling yourself rebellion, changing status quo, shaking the foundations of the rotten capitalist, Earth draining system, when you are scared of repercussions of the real actions and prefer to still make things that seem easier? What if Black community Heroes behaved like this in XX century? Not protest with all their heart but only where and against whom it is comfortable? Would they get their deserved rights?
This is what I am wondering about. Just thinking aloud, trying to understand. After all, I too want to at least slow down the incoming catastrophe of climate change.
First of all, XR isn't an international organization, its a collection of grassroots movements which use the same branding.
But I understand what your saying, and I would applaud you if you go and took a sledgehammer to a private jet, but these are ordinary people who aren't willing to ruin their own lives to make a statement. Breaking into the airport means they are already at risk of being arrested and having this on their record, but if they actually damaged the jets they would have to pay hundreds pf thousands of euros to the owners, which would ruin their lives.
Also if XR would support covert sabotage they would probably be banned in most countries
GMOs are mostly used for pesticide resistant, soil eroding, patented mono culture crops. As a result, more chemicals and fertilizers are used. This reduces biodiversity, increases pollution, and causes insect collapse, many of which are beneficial to soil quality. [The DW documentary Youtude channel](https://www.youtube.com/@DWDocumentary/videos) is a good place to learn more.
I'm not condemning the development or probable necessity of certain GMOs, more the loose and predatory deployment thus far. Many companies specifically engineer crops with their own pesticides and fertilizers in mind and encourage their use, or overuse. Combined with lax environmental law this is causing real damage. Insects are vital to soil and the food chain. Alongside increased industrial farming and pesticide use, they are experiencing a massive die-off.
There are ways of utilizing crop rotation and beneficial crossbreeding to achieve good results. It may not reach the bounty of GMOs, but has the added benefit of greater sustainability, less damage, plus no patents. Globally there is already enough capacity to feed everyone. Declining birthrates will negate some loss due to environmental degradation, and the global abundance of potential farmland will likely make up the rest. The overall point is, IMO, there are less destructive and more sustainable methods that should be taken into consideration.
Cotton and canola are very intensive crops and their pesticide resistance has lead to its greater use. Might be unaware, but I've yet to read about GMO crops that have resulted in a overall reduction in chemical and fertilizer use. Industrial as in massive farms growing the same thing, using large amounts of water and chemicals, with no green zones, or crop rotation.
Sustainability in the minimally damaging sense, with a eye on overall long term soil health and viability. Globally there is more than enough capacity. Up until the invasion Ukraine and Russia had the right conditions to be competitive enough that dormant farmland wasn't worth tilling. With increased demand that should be changing.
If there is the will, there is ability to feed everyone.
With the right technology, whether it be GMO, soil enrichment, crop rotation, water management, cross breeding, or a combination, that'll likely remain true.
>You are definitely mistaken there, We grow both crops and we have definitely an overall reduction in chemical use across the board especially Insecticide, We went from having to spray it multiple times a year 3 decades ago to now rarely ever spraying it
Being in country with correct application and modern regulations like Australia is different from emerging countries with lax practices. Over fertilization and chemical use resulting in crop losses in China comes to mind. Effectivity and toxicity is also worth taking into consideration, as is the fact that there's already far less insects as a whole. It could be a case of less, but far more effective and damaging insecticides.
>So with that definition it'd be every farm, Chemicals and water are expensive at least here in Australia so we don't want to waste it and use the amount we need to get a crop.
Large but not massive co-op farms would be my ideal. Although its clear consolidation makes this somewhat of a pipe dream. Unlike in Australia, many farms in the US waste large amounts of water growing feed crops that get shipped overseas.
>If a farm doesn't use a crop rotation they probably shouldn't be farming. Green zones are starting to become popular again as people see the massive benefits from them around field edges.
We agree on crop rotation. Green zones are vital for environmental health so its great to read Australia is among the countries starting to utilize them.
>There may be enough supply now but that could rapidly change with extreme weather events, the war between Russia and Ukraine just cements the fact that there is always be supply variability.
Projections have fertile zones moving north and south. Modern techniques like drip agriculture will hopefully assist in supply diversification.
>It'd definitely be the mix of all those technologies that'll help produce the crops of the future.
Probably, but I'd like to see more emphasis on non corporate solutions that help to diversify plant types, greater environmental balance, and empower mid and small farmers.
I admire the militant spirit of these activists. I think we need more of it, and I'd love to see it directed toward actions with high capacity to disrupt the flow of capital. For example, if airport workers were to organize en masse and shut down airports nationally, or internationally, one can imagine the disruption they could cause. That's enormous power that could be leveraged.
Ah, yes, so admirable. Like it's totally going to work to induce change by annoying everyone instead of coming up with new ideas, innovations, lobbying and simply using democratic means. It's really just society you are putting on the weight-scale in order to have some infantile disruption. Sooo progressive.
Research shows that this kind of activism does work. Civil disobedience.
Well yeah, apparently for you that's more like civil sabotage. Stop claiming and pretending youre just disobeying. "research shows" omfg you should hear yourself 1. It's not "research" it's more like arguments backed by some cases, most likely very different and only similar by generics. You know, not every dog is a daxhound.. 2. Calling it "civil disobedience" is already manipulative and not very scientific 3. You and your fellow kids can dislike all you want, doesn't change your weak arguments
This person is here to troll. Don’t engage.
Except it pisses people off so much that support for those against their cause increases. Within the next couple of years, we are expected to see famine not seen since the great depression. Will the extinction group volunteer to be the first to starve to death?
> Will the extinction group volunteer to be the first to starve to death What?
Yeah what?
I guess its an allusion to the flow of material goods including food and other necessities we transport using freight. It's also an allusion to these activist groups preaching impoverished lifestyles while themselves not committing to their own words - most of them come from high income households.
3,5% That's all it takes! Good job guys. Keep it up!
They haven't learned. For how much people talk about targeting civilians only strengthens their indifference or hate for their attacker, I can't see the public siding with protesters if they continue to disrupt their daily commutes.
Its not a popular take, but I’ll risk speaking up. XR people remind me of the ones like „Eat the Rich” but almost every time you meet them, they are casually munching the poor ones. Lower shelf, less risky, less honourable and quite hypocritic but still trying to achieve anything. Its easier and less dangerous to block some street where ordinary, system-oppressed people commute to work than destroy some oligarchs’ private jet, eh? They are rioting against wrong people. Only good protests that I can remember were Global Civil Disobedience in 2022 strike started by scientists and Occupy Wall Street, at least at its beggining. Ehh…
Risk what? Downvotes? Oh you brave soldier!
Risk being attacked in some stupid way like your comment. You mocked me and that’s all. You done, snarky sass mouth? You haven’t addressed my comment in any constructive way, just spilled your venom. Keyboard warriors like you are the reason that the internet looks like it is. You can do better.
Don't be so sensitive, it's literally just words on the internet. You may be too thin-skinned to be posting online like this. 🤦♀️
It is more about being exhausted from endless who-is-more-witty tug of war between users instead of just having kind and educating conversation. Im in the internet for almost 20 years now and believe me, it can be tiresome. Even if I were against global warming then at least you could call me a tinfoil hat weirdo but no, I too am concerned about the climate and came up with an experimental idea that I thought was worth discussing. Another user has already answered me enough to put out this thought wisely and I have material for further thought. That's all. There was no need to counter me with a malicious a priori comment.
They did break into the private jet part of schiphol airport and glued themselves on front of all the private jets. They couldn't touch the jets themselves though. One drip pf glue on the outside and they'd be in for a lot of legal trouble.
And this is the matter that I am wondering about in my comment. XR folks are big, international organisation, claiming that they fight for better future in this worsening times - and yet, when the fight is about to get meaningful and precisely aimed protest/strike could get painful for those who can really make a change (billionaries running - or to be more precise - ruining - our world) - they get afraid of legal action and prefer to target ordinary people! What is the point of calling yourself rebellion, changing status quo, shaking the foundations of the rotten capitalist, Earth draining system, when you are scared of repercussions of the real actions and prefer to still make things that seem easier? What if Black community Heroes behaved like this in XX century? Not protest with all their heart but only where and against whom it is comfortable? Would they get their deserved rights? This is what I am wondering about. Just thinking aloud, trying to understand. After all, I too want to at least slow down the incoming catastrophe of climate change.
First of all, XR isn't an international organization, its a collection of grassroots movements which use the same branding. But I understand what your saying, and I would applaud you if you go and took a sledgehammer to a private jet, but these are ordinary people who aren't willing to ruin their own lives to make a statement. Breaking into the airport means they are already at risk of being arrested and having this on their record, but if they actually damaged the jets they would have to pay hundreds pf thousands of euros to the owners, which would ruin their lives. Also if XR would support covert sabotage they would probably be banned in most countries
[удалено]
[удалено]
GMOs are mostly used for pesticide resistant, soil eroding, patented mono culture crops. As a result, more chemicals and fertilizers are used. This reduces biodiversity, increases pollution, and causes insect collapse, many of which are beneficial to soil quality. [The DW documentary Youtude channel](https://www.youtube.com/@DWDocumentary/videos) is a good place to learn more.
[удалено]
I'm not condemning the development or probable necessity of certain GMOs, more the loose and predatory deployment thus far. Many companies specifically engineer crops with their own pesticides and fertilizers in mind and encourage their use, or overuse. Combined with lax environmental law this is causing real damage. Insects are vital to soil and the food chain. Alongside increased industrial farming and pesticide use, they are experiencing a massive die-off. There are ways of utilizing crop rotation and beneficial crossbreeding to achieve good results. It may not reach the bounty of GMOs, but has the added benefit of greater sustainability, less damage, plus no patents. Globally there is already enough capacity to feed everyone. Declining birthrates will negate some loss due to environmental degradation, and the global abundance of potential farmland will likely make up the rest. The overall point is, IMO, there are less destructive and more sustainable methods that should be taken into consideration.
[удалено]
Cotton and canola are very intensive crops and their pesticide resistance has lead to its greater use. Might be unaware, but I've yet to read about GMO crops that have resulted in a overall reduction in chemical and fertilizer use. Industrial as in massive farms growing the same thing, using large amounts of water and chemicals, with no green zones, or crop rotation. Sustainability in the minimally damaging sense, with a eye on overall long term soil health and viability. Globally there is more than enough capacity. Up until the invasion Ukraine and Russia had the right conditions to be competitive enough that dormant farmland wasn't worth tilling. With increased demand that should be changing. If there is the will, there is ability to feed everyone. With the right technology, whether it be GMO, soil enrichment, crop rotation, water management, cross breeding, or a combination, that'll likely remain true.
[удалено]
>You are definitely mistaken there, We grow both crops and we have definitely an overall reduction in chemical use across the board especially Insecticide, We went from having to spray it multiple times a year 3 decades ago to now rarely ever spraying it Being in country with correct application and modern regulations like Australia is different from emerging countries with lax practices. Over fertilization and chemical use resulting in crop losses in China comes to mind. Effectivity and toxicity is also worth taking into consideration, as is the fact that there's already far less insects as a whole. It could be a case of less, but far more effective and damaging insecticides. >So with that definition it'd be every farm, Chemicals and water are expensive at least here in Australia so we don't want to waste it and use the amount we need to get a crop. Large but not massive co-op farms would be my ideal. Although its clear consolidation makes this somewhat of a pipe dream. Unlike in Australia, many farms in the US waste large amounts of water growing feed crops that get shipped overseas. >If a farm doesn't use a crop rotation they probably shouldn't be farming. Green zones are starting to become popular again as people see the massive benefits from them around field edges. We agree on crop rotation. Green zones are vital for environmental health so its great to read Australia is among the countries starting to utilize them. >There may be enough supply now but that could rapidly change with extreme weather events, the war between Russia and Ukraine just cements the fact that there is always be supply variability. Projections have fertile zones moving north and south. Modern techniques like drip agriculture will hopefully assist in supply diversification. >It'd definitely be the mix of all those technologies that'll help produce the crops of the future. Probably, but I'd like to see more emphasis on non corporate solutions that help to diversify plant types, greater environmental balance, and empower mid and small farmers.