In the news

You are reading a single comment by @hoefla and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

Dammit in reply to @hoefla

My point is that even in a city where it is easy and convenient for many people (obvs not all) to live day to day without cars, the cultural desirability of cars remains a problem underlying their excessive use. I'm sure it could be done in different, more effective, less smelly hippies ways, but it's valid that that idea needs countering and deflating. And the oversized power car - even if it actually doesn't use that much fuel - is a particular display of excess.

I'm not disagreeing with your point at all, what I'm saying is that taking aim at aspirational cars for protest plays into the hands of those who wish to discount all and any such protest.

It's very easy for someone to say "you're just envious of others success" when you target large and expensive cars.

Depends on what your goals from the protest are, I suppose - if you want to change the mind of the person who doesn't believe in climate change but is inclined to easy narratives based around envy that are promoted by the Mail etc then I suggest that reinforcing them is not the best way of doing so.

If it's just to feel good about protesting, I guess it works.

•

hoefla in reply to @Dammit

Any ideas how to do this in more persuasive, less disagreeable ways? (This is not a shut up, but a genuine question.)
The target change is not about climate change in general, and not about improving other transport/mobility options, but specifically the car as aspirational possession. (Also, in case not obvious, I'm not defending the Glasgow actions which I haven't actually read about, rather riffing on the general theme. )

•

jellybaby in reply to @hoefla

Any ideas how to do this in more persuasive, less disagreeable ways?

You basically can't while you are up against the marketing budgets of the car manufacturers. Needs banning like tobacco advertising.

About

Avatar for hoefla @hoefla started