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

  • nothingcorporate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    213
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 years ago

    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.

      • Perfide@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years 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.

        • UllallullooA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          The claim that some things are inherently wrong and illegal without written laws and that we intrinsically know such. Although it doesn’t anymore, the US traditionally has followed such a view, hence why the bill of rights says men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”, because it’s not what prohibits restrictions on free speech, gun bans, troop quartering, unreasonable searches and seizures, etc. It says those are inherently wrong and illegal regardless of what the written law saw.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      I am afraid you have this very straight :/ I am so sick of our corporate-fascist world order. Big corporations are basically the worst dictator you can imagine, but with money dedicated to a PR department.

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, imagine a 2D graph with axes going from legal to illegal, and legitimate to illegitimate.

      Some things are legal although they are illegitimate (like ‘Destroying the planet’), and others are illegal although they are legitimate (like some forms of civil disobedience or sabotage).

      In an ideal world the two are aligned, but ours is not ideal. Also worth noting legal-illegal is rather objective, while legitimate-illegitimate is rather subjective.

      I found Thoreau interesting on the topic, who commented being jailed for withholding taxes to not support the war: “The bars are meant to separate bad from good people”.

    • letsgo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      2 years 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.

      • scutiger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        She was peacefully protesting. There was no violence involved. She refused to move. She didn’t hurt or threaten anyone.

        There’s no dichotomy between peaceful and obstructive.