this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
13 points (100.0% liked)

worldnews

4810 readers
1 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil. Disagreements happen, that does not give you the right to personally insult each other.

  2. No racism or bigotry.

  3. Posts from sources that aren't known to be incredibly biased for either side of the spectrum are preferred. If this is not an option, you may post from whatever source you have as long as it is relevant to this community.

  4. Post titles should be the same as the article title.

  5. No spam, self-promotion, or trolling.

Instance-wide rules always apply.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

She told Swedish media that she will not be appealing the verdict.

all 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nothingcorporate@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Let me get this straight:

  • Destroying the planet for profit: LEGAL
  • Peacefully suggesting they shouldn't: ILLEGAL

The law has nothing to do with morality, no matter what anyone tells you.

[–] letsgo@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

/me does that unusual thing of actually reading the article ... ah, here we go "Protestors physically blocked oil tankers in the harbour... When the protestors were ordered to move to allow vehicles to pass, Greta was among those who refused. She was then dragged away by police."

So she wasn't peacefully protesting, which by the way IS legal in most places; she was being obstructive, somewhat like those Just Stop Oil muppets who glue themselves to roads. It's fine to protest. It's not fine to prevent others from living their lives, and that's why she was prosecuted.

We can stop oil when we have a better choice.

[–] MasterObee@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nobody has ever claimed laws are purely for morality.

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

No, but there are tons of people who believe something is moral as long as it's legal, and even more people who believe something being illegal makes it inherently immoral.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

her punishment was a 2500 SEK fine? They've just told the entire country that we can pay the equivalent of a new bicycle to block oil tankers, this is amazing.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where the hell do you get a new bicycle for 2500 SEK? I paid 2 or 3 times that for a midrange bike (in Estonia, admittedly). 2500 SEK is good used bike territory.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] boonhet@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Eh maybe if you only want to cycle slowly around town, sure. For me, a bicycle is more for exercise than transportation.

It's kinda the same as saying 8k EUR gets you a new car. I mean yeah, it's technically true, it gets you a Dacia Sandero, but most people will still go for something they can actually enjoy.

[–] geissi@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

if you only want to cycle slowly around town

That's what bikes are for.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

That's what THAT bike is for. A good bike can be used to actually get to places in time. Hence why I didn't know people under 60 get those in other countries.

I'm just saying it's weird to call the bare minimum "the price of a new X" in a comparison.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

what? this is a standard bike that anyone here would consider a proper bicycle, perfectly usable.

Like, the netherlands (where almost everyone rides a bike on the regular) is known for largely consisting of this kind of bike, it's all you need and buying something more expensive just poses a risk of theft or damage.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Difference in cycling cultures I suppose. Around here this would be considered an old lady bike. It's great for slowly cruising around the city, but I just wouldn't feel comfortable at high speeds, or on trails, etc. I prefer to get everywhere fast like a bat out of hell (an ADHD trait, going anything but my full speed, full-on anaerobic on my commute even, feels wrong and tedious) and need a single bicycle to work on roads, streets and trails, so I got this low-mid range hybrid. This is the most common type of bike here (well actually now fatbikes are more common, but that's a stupid trend. And I suppose full-on mountain bikes are very popular too).

[–] tchotchony@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well, you're right, this is a bike meant for transportation, not sports. Still counts as a bike though, so original comment is right too. Everybody in the Netherlands and Belgium has one of these (and if you wanna do cyclocross or bmx or fast road cycling, you have a second, third, ... bike)

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Ah yeah Estonia is not rich enough for everyone to buy 5 bikes so we buy one that can do everything.

[–] Ghallo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Harriet Tubman was also a criminal. Just about every single hero was technically a criminal.

[–] gk99@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Of all the things to be guilty of these days, that's a pretty decent one.

[–] TwoGems@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sweden found guilty of failing to obey world's leading scientists and researchers' calls for immediate drastic action against climate change.

[–] Pinto23@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

arrest Greta Thunberg

We did it, we arrested climate change!

[–] frostwhitewolf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a South Park episode

[–] bemenaker@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Cyo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Complaining about climate change will not make governments move nor civil disobedience, only when we get more than 100+ deaths due to hot temperatures per day and food shortage governments will react.
Sadly that's how our species work on a global scale, something must go really wrong to make the world do something about it.

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think you read your article. And Steve Forbes himself doesn't seem to have basic logic capabilities.

2023 was the supposed deadline for stopping the usage of fossil fuels, not the exact time humanity will be wiped out. Did you think this was going to happen in as little as one year?

It will take decades. But with every year we keep using fossil fuels, we're ensuring that it'll be worse.

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The way the climate alarmist make it sound it will. Or maybe there is other factors in play but you can't waste a good way to scare the populous into fear.

Not like we havent have had climate change before industrialization... Those glaciers melted just out of fun, hell we were told the late 70's it was a "micro ice age". Been around the block, this is a ploy for control. If these elites really cared about it they would scrape their G5's jets... Never gonna happen.

Plastic pollution in the sea, yeah thats on us. R22 eating the ozone, yeah again us. But CO2 is a natural compound, some man made, mostly naturally made. So I'm keeping w/ the status quo.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

ploy for control

I mean one might want to consider that oil production is also controlled by elites and brings them a lot of money, so it might be why media outlets like Forbes are being paid to call it "climate alarmism" lol

But CO2 is a natural compound, some man made, mostly naturally made

Natural CO2 is part of a mostly balanced cycle. That balance is no longer there. We're at a level that hasn't been seen before in human history. Higher CO2 levels have been seen on Earth before, but that was before our species.

The temperatures are going to be high enough that there will be no "going out" in many areas, you're restricted to air conditioned buildings and cars. If your AC breaks at the wrong time, you're fucked.

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

People have been living in way hotter environments for centuries w/o AC and modern convenience. I'm pretty sure we can do it again if it comes down to it...

Example:

https://old.lemmy.world/post/2083383

[–] hahattpro@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This girl just follow get famous quick scheme.

If you want to protect environment, prove it by action, not acting.

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

She already took all the actions she needs and more. Now she is teaching clueless meeks like you that they need to take actions too.
And I'm not talking about recycling and not using plastic straws, I'm talking collectively making elites accountable.
You, of course, will side with the elites that are killing you, but other people might not

[–] MercuryUprising@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's never enough for these people. She could literally be pulling carbon out of the environment with her bare hands, and people would say something like "wow, look at her doing it to get all the attention for herself"

[–] morphballganon@mtgzone.com 1 points 1 year ago

Modern conservatism is about complaining, not conserving. Greta is the one trying to conserve in this story.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you hate climate change get out and do something about it WAIT NOT LIKE THAT!!!!

You sound like my grandpa.

[–] MasterObee@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Grimr0c@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Because she is a public figure and a politically exposed persons

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's rather silly. She broke the law and was found guilty of doing so. Big deal.

Look, I think she's doing great things, but that doesn't give her immunity to the law. If anything, this conviction keeps her name in the news, so it may be a positive after all.

[–] MasterObee@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh it definitely feels like publicity stunt to me, I only know her name, don't really buy into either side deifying her or hating her. From what I've seen, she's someone who may not be qualified, but has a platform and is using it for something she believes in.

[–] KeyserSoze@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

deifying her

Yeah man, before we start a climate protest, we first pray to our savior goddess Greta Thunberg. We post up a ginormous picture of her and bow, sometimes even prostrate to it. We repeat her mantra "How dare you!" a hundred times before starting anything else, because this all is about creating a personality cult, not actually protesting our meagerness when fighting climate change.

/s

[–] MasterObee@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

There are plenty of other scientists to get behind, but you guys chose a teenager without any real qualifications.

Sounds like she was your 'chosen' one.