
- cross-posted to:
- inperson@slrpnk.net
- climate_lm@slrpnk.net
A reminder folks: people engage in this kind of radical protest because it works:
Results of two online experiments conducted with diverse samples (N = 2,772), including a study of the animal rights movement and a preregistered study of the climate movement, show that the presence of a radical flank increases support for a moderate faction within the same movement. Further, it is the use of radical tactics, such as property destruction or violence, rather than a radical agenda, that drives this effect. Results indicate the effect owes to a contrast effect: Use of radical tactics by one flank led the more moderate faction to appear less radical, even though all characteristics of the moderate faction were held constant. This perception led participants to identify more with and, in turn, express greater support for the more moderate faction. These results suggest that activist groups that employ unpopular tactics can increase support for other groups within the same movement, pointing to a hidden way in which movement factions are complementary, despite pursuing divergent approaches to social change.
People have been doing this because it works
Even more reason to practice proper opsec. Since they arrested him before he even managed to get near the airport its clear his plan was revealed somehow.
*her
ah, yes
It doesn’t.
evidence points out that it does.
if you’re going to assert it doesn’t, at least provide a shred of evidence - the person you’re replying to linked an academic paper, and your brilliant reply “nuh uh” doesn’t really carry the same gravitas.
This is synthetic research which doesn’t match the reality. A real life example would be XR in the UK which has like 20% support from the public, especially after they blocked ambulances and disrupted the tube. And that has led to a situation that if you want to talk about the environment everyone will look at you like you’re an XR degenerate, so the whole topic is slowly becoming a taboo.
if you’re going to assert it doesn’t, at least provide a shred of evidence - the person you’re replying to linked an academic paper, and your brilliant reply “nuh uh” doesn’t really carry the same gravitas.
and have yet to provide anything substantive - like links to research.