This is not to say that change is impossible. But, historically, the only time meaningful change has happened is when there was overwhelming social pressure. We aren't talking about petty (and for the most part meaningless) activism here and there. We're talking about social dissent of such magnitude that it threatens to become a revolution. Only in such times has the establishment allowed any sort of concession.
I believe the odds of activism like this stopping fracking companies is actually very good. Which is why they are being met with police brutality. Suppose fracking protestors can reduce the likelihood of fracking companies to get local land exploitation permits from 95% to 90%, then that is a huge win and will save many wildlife areas.
It may not be "meaningful change" in the large scheme of things, but wins in many small fights compound and leads to bigger changes. Convincing people that they can't make a difference is the most efficient method for suppressing dissent.
Comments
I believe the odds of activism like this stopping fracking companies is actually very good. Which is why they are being met with police brutality. Suppose fracking protestors can reduce the likelihood of fracking companies to get local land exploitation permits from 95% to 90%, then that is a huge win and will save many wildlife areas.
It may not be "meaningful change" in the large scheme of things, but wins in many small fights compound and leads to bigger changes. Convincing people that they can't make a difference is the most efficient method for suppressing dissent.