Hacker News Reader

Comment by BLKNSLVR | Hacker News Reader

My thoughts were along similar lines in terms of "if this group, then why not them, and them, and them, and them, and them" where pretty much every single "them" I can think of is a much greater blight on society than climate protesters.

I'm a supporter of Australia's gun laws, but not a supporter of this kind of over-the-top restrictions for, what I consider to be (and that's the rub), the trivial / minor offense of protesting.

The protection of "the economy" is paranoia-level, which doesn't bode well. Corruption is a transaction that encourages more transactions, whilst protest is only ever a restriction, therefore if the economy is the priority then protest is a worse crime than corruption.

No wonder there are climate protesters...

View on HN

It's so trivial when you gridlock major cities REPEATEDLY to spread a 'message' that could be told in a million other ways. Its trivial to worry about things like 'the economy' that provides a means to put a roof over your head and the ability to feed yourself and your family. Only someone who has little to no responsibilities could find it trivial.

When I first watched The Blues Brothers as a kid I thought they'd go to jail forever for all the carnage they wrought driving through that shopping centre, and I totally could not understand why my dad laughed and said "it's not that serious".

Now I do understand that. A long while ago I understood that.

A long while ago did you also understand the difference between fantasy and reality? That events in a movie created to entertain the viewer have no consequences. That you don’t see all the insurance claims and lawsuits because it’s not entertainment.

Do you understand what an economy is? Do you understand that you don’t build your own home or grow your own food or supply your own power and water? That there needs to be a means for you to purchase these items?

Do you understand what impacting services and business means? Do you understand the negative consequences?

It’s so ‘not serious’ that the government has had to introduce new laws to deter people from disrupting the city.

I think we're irreconcilably on opposite sides of an ideological wall on this topic. I understand what you're saying and your point of view, I just don't agree with it. I think there's a matter of scale and timing as well.

Covid has made the economy much more fragile than it used to be, but it has also removed the veil of the importance of being in the office, so disruption to city streets is less of a hit on overall economic productivity than it used to be.

> It’s so ‘not serious’ that the government has had to introduce new laws to deter people from disrupting the city.

In regards to this, that's the core of the problem and the ideological difference of opinion. What one government legislates against, another government is just as likely to repeal as overreach based on what each government considers important or what keeps their pockets full.

Just because you believe in something doesn't mean any action you take to push that belief is acceptable. There are not multiple groups blocking major roads, bus ways, bridges, trains etc. only climate protestors.

Take this scenario, imagine someone dying in gridlock in the back of an ambulance because a protestor glued/chained himself to the road. Extreme? It's happened. Now for what special reason was this person glued to the road for? So they could hold a sign that says 'end fossil fuels'. Thats it, holding a sign!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com