I don't want to speak ill of those who courage and morals lead them to take on such an act (and maybe I am misunderstanding their intentions), but I find it puzzling to think that an act of protest like self-immolation could change the minds of the rulers who've spent the last year proving they will legitimize, facilitate, and take pride in mass killing, debilitation, and displacement.

These people have proven to the world that they have no regard for human life or human dignity, so how could more suffering change their minds?

It's questions like these that send me back to re-read Aime Cesaire and Frantz Fanon, who I think are essential authors. Cesaire to understand colonization; Fanon to understand decolonization.

[–] anarcho_blinkenist@hexbear.net 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

its not to change minds of any rulers at all, nor is it about "garnering empathy for suffering" like people in this thread are shallowly insinuating. it is an act of pure spectacle in a shocking self-destruction in such an extreme way such that public eyes are drawn toward it and back to it again. it is a show of horror for those who have the benefit of insulating themselves from distant horror by bringing it home and drawing eyes to it; a more extreme version of an obstructive public protest like the "museum soup thrower" thing. It is also done in a way that is in societal terms neutral spectacle as compared to an adventurist terror attack which would also make unignorable and draw eyes but would prompt active reaction and disdain in the minds of the masses and give more excuse for the ruling class politically for repression.

I wouldn't ever advise such an act; but seeking to force-draw attention and force discomfort in a populace much of which is generally mired in much inattentiveness and comfort isn't a totally pointless or meaningless decision bereft of reason. I don't think it is the most effective as a tactic either, but as a reflection of an individualist society where we are (all of us, in 'the west' even all of us here from 'the west') constrained in and often limited by in all our first and passive impulses, in which we require much study and ongoing deconstructing and constant vigilance most don't have and none of us have at all times to see past it

seeing a totally inattentive and atomized and in large proportions too-comfortable society, from within and as a part of this hyper-individualist society, one can easily understand its manifesting and purpose when looked at with criticality. I would never advise this act, and don't think it is the most effective use of yourself in the struggle, but I would venture most people who jump at the first opportunity to belittle the individual and their sacrifice have probably not sacrificed much in the struggle themselves at all to speak from higher ground; and often live off the kind of comfort built on the bones of those bombed, the comfort which these individuals are trying to disrupt.

[–] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 7 points 4 weeks ago

This is just propaganda of the deed but even less dangerous to authorities.

[–] ClimateChangeAnxiety@hexbear.net 6 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

I’ll be honest, at this point I feel like if you’re planning on doing something like this, you’d be better off doing adventure-time instead.

Garnering sympathy clearly doesn’t work. If you’ve decided to end your life for this, I feel like it’d be better to do some actual damage.