# Just Stop Oil



## cybershot (Apr 7, 2022)

Surprised no mention of this lot on here.

For about a week now they have been targeting the Oil depot by me and seems their intent is to cause fuel shortages across the country, so don't be surprised if panic buying starts again soon.

Whilst I get what they are trying to do, being on the other side of the fence feeling all the knock on effects it's causing ordinary people in our area, patience is wearing thin with protestors and the police. Not helped by the area already being affected by HS2 works causing disruption in the area.


----------



## Petcha (Apr 13, 2022)

There's a couple of them currently on top of a tanker truck lorry holding up their 'just stop oil' banner. Unfortunately the tanker is carrying chemicals for food production from the netherlands, not oil..


----------



## Supine (Apr 13, 2022)

Not seen this on the news but heard about it, word of mouth, as petrol has been hard to find in Kent since last week. Apparently so, i don’t drive so don’t care


----------



## two sheds (Apr 13, 2022)

I went on TV to explain Just Stop Oil – and it became a parody of Don’t Look Up | Miranda Whelehan
					

I wanted to sound the alarm about oil exploration and the climate crisis, but Good Morning Britain just didn’t want to hear, says campaigner Miranda Whelehan




					www.theguardian.com
				




didn't see the programme, but this is quite coherent from Just Stop Oil representative.


----------



## Ax^ (Apr 13, 2022)

it been happening for about 2 weeks as far as i remember

it will hit the headlines with about tommorow as people try to get away

idological fair play to them but timing has never been the high point of the campaign


----------



## two sheds (Apr 13, 2022)

Yep seems a mistake to hit people just trying to get on with their lives. Better you'd think to go after the companies without causing people short-term problems so making themselves unpopular.


----------



## Ax^ (Apr 13, 2022)

disrupte the queen jubilee weekend as much as they feel

maybe leave the first really long bank holiday alone for reason of not being unpopular with the public
anyone who not a parent knows your getting rinsed for holiday cost already and in the current climate
let them be angry about the Tory party and don't give a distraction

but hey ho my 2 bits


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 13, 2022)

“Just Stop Oil” … if only it was that simple


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 14, 2022)

LARC Social Centre raided in Just Stop Oil crackdown
					

Eleven people have been arrested in a midnight raid at London Action Resource Centre (LARC) in Whitechapel, for conspiracy to commit a public nuisance. According to one witness, more than 40 office…




					freedomnews.org.uk


----------



## ska invita (Apr 14, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> LARC Social Centre raided in Just Stop Oil crackdown
> 
> 
> Eleven people have been arrested in a midnight raid at London Action Resource Centre (LARC) in Whitechapel, for conspiracy to commit a public nuisance. According to one witness, more than 40 office…
> ...


outrageous---pre=emptive arrests right?



platinumsage said:


> “Just Stop Oil” … if only it was that simple


Its just stop new digs


----------



## 8ball (Apr 14, 2022)

cybershot said:


> Surprised no mention of this lot on here.



Think there's been some mention in the Extinction Rebellion thread.


----------



## maomao (Apr 14, 2022)

Should be very popular round here. They're doing what everyone here said Insulate Britain should be doing.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 14, 2022)

maomao said:


> Should be very popular round here. They're doing what everyone here said Insulate Britain should be doing.



They _are_ Insulate Britain.

So I guess they listen, at least.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2022)

8ball said:


> They _are_ Insulate Britain.
> 
> So I guess they listen, at least.


You said and we did


----------



## Micky D (Apr 17, 2022)

Middle class kids on a jolly . If the working class lorry drivers sort them out its their own fault ...


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 17, 2022)

Some of them might be, others are not. The average salary for a tanker truck driver meanwhile is 32k-odd. Which is nearly spot-on median pay for the UK, putting them fairly solidly in the middle class income bracket.

Give yourself a ding round the ear for getting your opinions direct from the comments section of the right-wing press Micky.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 17, 2022)

The idea that a tanker driver is going to be middle class by virtue of their salary is pretty desperate though.


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Apr 17, 2022)

Would you lot be coming out with the same crap if transport workers were on strike?


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The idea that a tanker driver is going to be middle class by virtue of their salary is pretty desperate though.


Depends, are you arguing class as an identity or an economic position?


----------



## 8ball (Apr 17, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> Depends, are you arguing class as an identity or an economic position?



<opens a pack of popcorn>


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 17, 2022)

Across the sands, upon the beach, a word of horror is whispered ... _iiiidddpppppooollll_


----------



## Peter Painter (Apr 18, 2022)

I know someone who has been part of the Just Stop Oil protests. Before the action they didn't know where they would be protesting or what exactly they would be doing. Just told to get to a particular train station and await further instructions.

They ended up glued to the road outside some depot until eventually arrested before being released in the early hours of the morning (no surprise with that bit!).

The second protest was much the same except that this time the police changed tactics and let them stay glued to the road all through the night before arresting them. It was apparently very uncomfortable and very cold.

I think it was a good effort, I'm not sure I'd have been up for doing all that. 

I get the criticism that this and ER are a bit 'middle class', and that their tactics sometimes disrupt the lives of normal working class folk, but even despite this I still support their cause.

My protesting friend is many things but middle class they most definitely are not!


----------



## ska invita (Apr 18, 2022)

Peter Painter said:


> I get the criticism that this and ER are a bit 'middle class', and that their tactics sometimes disrupt the lives of normal working class folk, but even despite this I still support their cause.


Seems like a deliberate attempt by the right to create a class-culture division on the issue and nothing more than that.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 18, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Seems like a deliberate attempt by the right to create a class-culture division on the issue and nothing more than that.



It might seem like that but have you actually listened to any actual workers affected?


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 18, 2022)

Threshers_Flail said:


> Would you lot be coming out with the same crap if transport workers were on strike?



Pretty sure many other unions commonly support transport strikes. Do you have a list of unions that have supported these protests?


----------



## ska invita (Apr 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> It might seem like that but have you actually listened to any actual workers affected?



yes and my opinion of extinction rebellion relies on the testimony of taxi drivers.
whats your point caller?


----------



## ska invita (Apr 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Pretty sure many other unions commonly support transport strikes.


TRANSPORT STRIKES!!! HAve you actually listened to workers affected by a transport strike!!


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 18, 2022)

ska invita said:


> whats your point caller?



That these protests aren't a working-class movement and the protestors have made no attempt whatsoever to connect with workers, so the protests won't be effective.

Surely the best way to "stop oil" is for the oil workers to come out on strike backed by a deep strike fund that these road-gluers have helped fill.


----------



## Peter Painter (Apr 18, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Seems like a deliberate attempt by the right to create a class-culture division on the issue and nothing more than that.



Yes, quite probably. But possibly a relatively effective attempt as there is some truth in the criticisms.

I went to an XR meeting a few years back and felt a bit out of place. One of my mates was told we weren't the type of people they were looking for. I wasn't sure if we were too crusty or too anarcho. Possibly both!

I also think that sometimes their tactics seem short-sighted and counter productive; simultaneously alienating the people they should be trying to recruit (at least as supporters of their cause) and playing straight into the hands of their opponents.


----------



## hitmouse (Apr 18, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> Depends, are you arguing class as an identity or an economic position?


I'd say that both can be useful, but if I had to pick one definition, then I'd go with option c, social relationship. If you want to pull out some stats about how many truck drivers own their own trucks and go for an argument about means of production and petit-bourgeois artisans or something, then you can do that, but I still dunno if it'd be a very good use of a bank holiday afternoon. But wages are a pretty weak argument, unless you do the same thing with tube drivers?


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 18, 2022)

I mean obviously using money alone here is a little facetious inasmuch as "middle class" in the sphere of political rhetoric is an inherently vague and loaded term mainly cited by people who would like to use it to qualify or disqualify a given group/individual which they're trying to praise or criticise. So are self-proclaimed identities and social relationships. There's a reason why the "middle class students" of XR (citation needed) are being compared to a horny-handed son of toil eh? Even if said progeny is in a job that actually is pretty enviably secure and pays abut the same as senior teaching staff.

Question: Is a person with oily hands and the exact same spending power as a person who spends their day with kids in a classroom, requiring a degree to get the role, more or less working class? One for that BBC survey perhaps.

(If we want to go full stereotype about it, a rock n roll listening lorry driver who's bought a house with their x6 mortgage, has a modest amount of savings, loves sports and obsessively posts their opinions on Facebook comes out as "technical middle class.")

Edit: I should say by the way I have _lots_ of criticisms of XR, up to and including the sharp elbows of some of its fulltimers. But the "indolent rich vs real working people" tropes offer no light whatsoever and only really benefit the right-wing's desire to push the subject into a deserving vs underserving protester "debate" rather than confronting issues which actually should be addressed.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 18, 2022)

They want to “immediately halt all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK”.

Apparently, allowing such extraction is “genocidal”.

If these extractions are stopped it will mean importing more LPG and oil from e.g. Qatar and Nigeria, where no doubt licensing and consents will be issued to help satisfy our import demand.

Nothing that XR/IB/whatever front they use next says ever stands up scrutiny.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 18, 2022)

So to summarise, you don't like a direct action group because they use hyperbole and are only aiming to stop fossil fuel extraction in the area where they live and can potentially affect government decisions, rather than in Qatar and Nigeria, where they don't live and have no say at all in the matter. I can see your masterful strategies will serve you well in carrying out erm, whatever more effective plan you might have I guess. When you implement it.


----------



## rich! (Apr 19, 2022)

Peter Painter said:


> Yes, quite probably. But possibly a relatively effective attempt as there is some truth in the criticisms.
> 
> I went to an XR meeting a few years back and felt a bit out of place. One of my mates was told we weren't the type of people they were looking for. I wasn't sure if we were too crusty or too anarcho. Possibly both!
> 
> I also think that sometimes their tactics seem short-sighted and counter productive; simultaneously alienating the people they should be trying to recruit (at least as supporters of their cause) and playing straight into the hands of their opponents.



One of the great pleasures of post-XR demos on almost any theme has been that XR have trained a bunch of middle-class do-gooders that they can do something - and it's to sit in the traffic and stop the cars and annoy the police who have to then deal with a bunch of pissed-off taxi drivers and SUV owners who demand their right to drive anywhere at any time regardless.

Meanwhile, the rest of the demo gets a road blocked and the time and space to get on with the demo.

Each to their own.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Apr 19, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The idea that a tanker driver is going to be middle class by virtue of their salary is pretty desperate though.


Makes train drivers positively aristocratic


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 19, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> I can see your masterful strategies will serve you well in carrying out erm, whatever more effective plan you might have I guess. When you implement it.



I'm pretty sure that conducting no direct action will be more effective than what they're doing which will only increase the demand to improve fossil-fuel energy security.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 19, 2022)

You're just having a good old moan using some unevidenced conjecture and have no ideas of your own, got it. What a fantastic use of a day.


----------



## hitmouse (Apr 19, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I'm pretty sure that conducting no direct action will be more effective than what they're doing which will only increase the demand to improve fossil-fuel energy security.


So your plan to reduce fossil fuel usage is to extract and burn more fossil fuels?


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 19, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> So your plan to reduce fossil fuel usage is to extract and burn more fossil fuels?



Completely missed the point, and how does targeting domestic supply rather than demand help the situation? There are already multiple detailed plans for reductions in fossil fuel use across the economy, the sort of detail that these protests don't want to engage with. Instead they are like a spoiled child having a tantrum smearing crap over their toys saying "nah nah nah don't like it".


----------



## hitmouse (Apr 19, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Completely missed the point, and how does targeting domestic supply rather than demand help the situation?


Oh, so you're saying that they should be demanding more insulation for homes instead? If you can't see how stopping people digging up oil and burning it helps the problem of people digging up oil and burning it, then I'm not sure I can help you.


platinumsage said:


> There are already multiple detailed plans for reductions in fossil fuel use across the economy, the sort of detail that these protests don't want to engage with. Instead they are like a spoiled child having a tantrum smearing crap over their toys saying "nah nah nah don't like it".


Aye, that's right, best leave it to the experts. Oh, one more thing, could you remind me of a) what the historical record of these plans versus reality so far is - you know, how many carbon targets have been hit and how many have been missed, that sort of thing, and b) how these plans compare to the scale of change that's needed? Cos stories like this are making me feel like we've got a lot worse to come than crap being smeared over us:








						Britain risks missing climate targets due to lack of policies -advisers
					

Britain's lack of policies to meet net zero emissions by 2050 is jeopardising its chance of meeting the target, the country's climate advisers said in a progress report on Thursday.




					www.reuters.com
				



I think "nah nah nah don't like it" is a pretty reasonable response to that future.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> So your plan to reduce fossil fuel usage is to extract and burn more fossil fuels?


he's an unenviable record of pumping out hot air here anyway


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 19, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Oh, so you're saying that they should be demanding more insulation for homes instead? If you can't see how stopping people digging up oil and burning it helps the problem of people digging up oil and burning it, then I'm not sure I can help you.
> 
> Aye, that's right, best leave it to the experts.



I‘d rather leave it to experts than road-gluing randoms thanks.



hitmouse said:


> Oh, one more thing, could you remind me of a) what the historical record of these plans versus reality so far is - you know, how many carbon targets have been hit and how many have been missed, that sort of thing, and



The UK easily met the Kyoto targets for carbon reduction in both the first and second commitment periods, and all carbon budgets 1 to 3 of the EU ETS system. It has met all targets set to date. Previous plans have therefore been shown to have been reliable and effective.



hitmouse said:


> b) how these plans compare to the scale of change that's needed? Cos stories like this are making me feel like we've got a lot worse to come than crap being smeared over us:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How does stopping investment in domestic production and relying more on imports help meet carbon reduction targets?


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 20, 2022)

But you're not "leaving it to the experts." You're leaving it to politicians. 



> It has met all targets set to date.



Lol. 

But seriously, politicians. These people ignored or undermined concerns about climate change throughout the 20th century and _happened _to start doing something in the wake of a massive upsurge in interest and direct action around environmental concerns. Pressure was kept up throughout the 1990s-2000s including climate camps, road protests, anti-runway actions etc. If it had been left solely to the politicians they would have listened to the corporations which, throughout this period, were lobbying hard to dismiss the very idea of climate change itself. And even then, much of what the UK government _actually_ did to "meet the Kyoto target" involved leveraging the nation's ongoing de-industrialisation process through Emissions Trading Schemes - even what they  have been forced to do is laced with half-truths.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 20, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Surely the best way to "stop oil" is for the oil workers to come out on strike backed by a deep strike fund that these road-gluers have helped fill.



Cool, if you could sort that I’ll send some cash to your Gofundme to support replacing the workers’ wages.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 20, 2022)

no I think there's an important point here, rather than 'Just Stop Oil', the movement should more accurately be called 'Please just reduce Oil a bit by Increasing the Percentage of Renewables and developing Battery Backups to store it over the Evening'


----------



## Nigel (Apr 20, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> Depends, are you arguing class as an identity or an economic position?


Or even as position in the means of production!


----------



## 8ball (Apr 20, 2022)

Nigel said:


> Or even as position in the means of production!



Can't believe it took 3 days for someone to say that!


----------



## hitmouse (Apr 20, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> That these protests aren't a working-class movement and the protestors have made no attempt whatsoever to connect with workers, so the protests won't be effective.
> 
> Surely the best way to "stop oil" is for the oil workers to come out on strike backed by a deep strike fund that these road-gluers have helped fill.


Missed this one before, but just to say: yeah, wouldn't it be crazy if oil workers went out on strike and XR came out in support of them?

(Relevant bit starts at about 2:30 in.)


----------



## Dystopiary (Apr 20, 2022)

two sheds said:


> no I think there's an important point here, rather than 'Just Stop Oil', the movement should more accurately be called 'Please just reduce Oil a bit by Increasing the Percentage of Renewables and developing Battery Backups to store it over the Evening'


Getting there! 

Science | AAAS 



> How do you bottle renewable energy for when the Sun doesn’t shine and the wind won’t blow? That’s one of the most vexing questions standing in the way of a greener electrical grid. Massive battery banks are one answer. But they’re expensive and best at storing energy for a few hours, not for days long stretches of cloudy weather or calm. Another strategy is to use surplus energy to heat a large mass of material to ultrahigh temperatures, then tap the energy as needed. This week, researchers report a major improvement in a key part of that scheme: a device for turning the stored heat back into electricity.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Apr 20, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> Some of them might be, others are not. The average salary for a tanker truck driver meanwhile is 32k-odd. Which is nearly spot-on median pay for the UK, putting them fairly solidly in the middle class income bracket.
> 
> Give yourself a ding round the ear for getting your opinions direct from the comments section of the right-wing press Micky.


Skilled workers not middle class. However back when my dad retired 11 years ago as an oil tanker driver him and his colleagues were on more like 40k so it shows how bad things are now. 
However I can guarantee that if this had happened back then him and his 100% unionised mates would have sat back and cracked open the popcorn. They wouldn't have attacked the protestors or supported them, but would've enjoyed the disruption to business as usual.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 20, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> Getting there!
> 
> Science | AAAS



If only we had a decades-old, mature technology that produced a constant baseload of power without generating additional carbon, no matter the weather conditions. Maybe it could do something clever like extracting heat energy from the fission of atomic nuclei or something.


----------



## Dystopiary (Apr 20, 2022)

NoXion said:


> If only we had a decades-old, mature technology that produced a constant baseload of power without generating additional carbon, no matter the weather conditions. Maybe it could do something clever like extracting heat energy from the fission of atomic nuclei or something.


I guess this is for another thread, but I don't support nuclear power myself.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 20, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> I guess this is for another thread, but I don't support nuclear power myself.



Sure, let's waste time getting unproven battery tech to work instead.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 20, 2022)

Ignoring the arguments of whether we should or not, there's a simple logistical issue which tends to get overlooked in the whole "arg a crisis, let's go nuclear" thing - building a nuclear plant takes a long time. If you laid the first concrete tomorrow the average construction period would be 7.5 years  - though this lengthens considerably if, like Britain, you're relying on foreign constructors because you don't have an indigenous industry any more (eg. Hinckley C is being farmed out to EDF). This is not the full story however, because as we know, selecting and confirming sites takes a long time (as it's technically specific) and will almost always involve a huge battle with local people who don't want it. You've got design, financing, future disposal and costs etc etc to consider.

As an example. Sizewell B was first announced as a nuclear power station in 1980. It began actually producing power in 1995. Hinckley C was announced in 2008, and is expected to start generating power in 2026. That's a 15-year and 18-year turnaround respectively. This means, based on the announcement not of specific new plants but of the _intention_ to build some by Johnson's government this month, we are probably looking at the 2040s before we see a drop of power. If it's done properly rather than the horror scenario of a rush job done on y'know, a nuclear power plant, of course.

Which is rather late for sorting out a 2022 fuel crisis and a climate crisis which the IPCC reckons needs sorting within the decade.


----------



## hitmouse (Apr 20, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> If it's done properly rather than the horror scenario of a rush job done on y'know, a nuclear power plant, of course.


This bit is worth stressing, I think, the question of whether nuclear power could be used safely and sustainably in a future communist utopia might be an interesting one but it's not what we're faced with, the question now is do we want nuclear power plants built and operated by the current Serco/Crapita-garchy? The fact that last year saw a major dispute over firms trying to hire unskilled/untrained labourers to do electrical work at Hinkley Point C not reassuring on that front.


----------



## cybershot (Apr 23, 2022)

Not quite the way to get the public onside.


----------



## killer b (Apr 23, 2022)

I don't they're pursuing a strategy that involves getting the public onside tbf, so all the _this won't get the public onside!_ chat is a bit redundant.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 23, 2022)

"Be less reliant on oil" and "keep it in the ground" are both scientifically backed and generally popular concepts. What's missing is political will, and that's because big oil has exceptional leverage. Disruption is intended to counter that by making retention of the status quo less attractive. 

It's not a popularity contest - though constantly pushing a topic into the news also has its own benefits (eg. while spending countless column inches saying Insulate Britain were being counterproductive guess what was being mentioned extensively every single time).


----------



## BassJunkie (Apr 24, 2022)

I'm appalled to find it's cheaper for us as a family to fly to Edinburgh than get the train. Because I guess, jetfuel is subsidised, roads are provided as a public service, but trains must make a profit. There's all kinds of inequities. It must be almost certain that any scepticism about anthropogenic climate change (of which there is a tremendous amount) is funded by the oil companies. It's absurd to burn a finite resource that destroys our habitat just because it's "cheaper" and more convenient than other means of power. 

Having said that, if Just Stop Oil want to convince me of their cause they would do better if they weren't adorned in high vis jackets (made from oil) and helmets (made from oil), megaphones (made from oil) and other products made from oil. It undermines their argument.


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

BassJunkie said:


> Having said that, if Just Stop Oil want to convince me of their cause they would do better if they weren't adorned in high vis jackets (made from oil) and helmets (made from oil), megaphones (made from oil) and other products made from oil. It undermines their argument.



That is a joke right? Or do you expect them to wear hemp shirts and use no electricity as well?


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> That is a joke right? Or do you expect them to wear hemp shirts and use no electricity as well?



Vegans don't wear leather, apparently it's important not to support the farming industry even indirectly in a minor way (despite it being a by-product that may otherwise go to waste) and it's easy to do without much personal sacrifice (lots of alternatives). 

I suppose if the Just Stop Oil protesters don't actually want to stop oil than they wouldn't find the use of oil products goes against their principals.


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

FFS, these really are shit criticisms.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> FFS, these really are shit criticisms.



If their argument wasn't shitty and disingenuous e.g. they acknowledged we need some oil in the medium term and that requires investment in oil infrastructure, then maybe those would be shitty criticisms.


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If their argument wasn't shitty and disingenuous e.g. they acknowledged we need some oil in the medium term and that requires investment in oil infrastructure, then maybe those would be shitty criticisms.



Have you even looked at their website and their demands? No new oil exploration and extraction from what I can see. Not _literally_ 'stop using anything made of oil now'.

No, they're shit criticisms as it's not possible to avoid using oil or oil derived products, so using that as an argument is nothing but an attempt to discredit what they're saying while pretending to be clever. If they did try and do that people would call them 'idealists' etc.

It's the same as people having a go at anyone who criticizes capitalism with 'Yeah but you drink coffee at Starbucks' or something similar. Plenty of criticisms to be made, but 'Oh look you used a megaphone that's made of oil, it undermines your argument' is disingenuous, stupid, and comes from a place of smug 'I'm so clever' egotism worthy of Piers Morgan.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> No, they're shit criticisms as it's not possible to avoid using oil or oil derived products, so using that as an argument is nothing but an attempt to discredit what they're saying while pretending to be clever. If they did try and do that people would call them 'idealists' etc.
> 
> It's the same as people having a go at anyone who criticizes capitalism with 'Yeah but you drink coffee at Starbucks' or something similar.
> 
> It's disingenuous, stupid, and comes from a place of smug 'I'm so clever' egotism worthy of Piers Morgan.



Nope, it's far more analogous to veganism than anti-capitalism, because some oil products can be replaced, sometimes with detriment to cost and utility.

As I said, it highlights the facile nature of their demands. If it was easy to avoid all oil products, then stopping oil extraction and investment would be a reasonable goal. But it's not, so oil investment is still needed.


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Nope, it's far more analogous to veganism than anti-capitalism, because some oil products can be replaced, sometimes with detriment to cost and utility.
> 
> As I said, it highlights the facile nature of their demands. If it was easy to avoid all oil products, then stopping oil extraction and investment would be a reasonable goal. But it's not, so oil investment is still needed.



Go on then, what would call your group working this issue, and what would your demands be? Or do you think the issue is not something people should be doing anything about?

From a quick look, this is their central demand...

"We demand that the government immediately halt all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK."

I haven't seen "Stop all oil extraction right now and stop wearing or using anything made oil now" as one of their demands, but happy to be corrected.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 24, 2022)

BassJunkie said:


> I'm appalled to find it's cheaper for us as a family to fly to Edinburgh than get the train. Because I guess, jetfuel is subsidised, roads are provided as a public service, but trains must make a profit. There's all kinds of inequities. It must be almost certain that any scepticism about anthropogenic climate change (of which there is a tremendous amount) is funded by the oil companies. It's absurd to burn a finite resource that destroys our habitat just because it's "cheaper" and more convenient than other means of power.
> 
> Having said that, if Just Stop Oil want to convince me of their cause they would do better if they weren't adorned in high vis jackets (made from oil) and helmets (made from oil), megaphones (made from oil) and other products made from oil. It undermines their argument.



Liked for the first paragraph.


----------



## BassJunkie (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> That is a joke right? Or do you expect them to wear hemp shirts and use no electricity as well?


Well, isn't that the consequence of Just Stopping Oil? Perhaps I'm taking them too literally.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Go on then, what would call your group working this issue, and what would your demands be? Or do you think the issue is not something people should be doing anything about?



Lots of people are doing stuff about it, although this involves actual work and doesn’t involve road-gluing so probably goes unnoticed by those taking a quick look. If I wanted to protest about this issue I’d focus solely on the setting and adherence to climate targets for carbon reduction, especially the regular reviewing of these and accountability of government in that regard. Disrupting supplies of anything would be very last on my list, just below disrupting demand because those actions are likely to be counterproductive and also affect the poorest in society the most. i.e. worse than not protesting at all. But maybe you have better ideas?



LynnDoyleCooper said:


> From a quick look, this is their central demand...
> 
> "We demand that the government immediately halt all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK."
> 
> I haven't seen "Stop all oil extraction right now and stop wearing or using anything made oil now" as one of their demands, but happy to be corrected.



I don’t know how they expect us to continue to use fossil fuel products without producing or investing in fossil fuels. Presumably they want us to import them instead but apparently that’s ok because someone upthread said they can’t be expected to protest against foreign stuff.

We need gas for power and heat to support renewables until other technical solutions are developed. We need oil for plastics and other industrial uses until replacements are found. If we don’t invest in fossil fuel for such purposes we’ll end up with supply problems through decrepit infrastructure right at the choke point when we’re trying to but as yet unable to complete the transition away from them. It will make the transition harder, slower, more expensive and lead to greater carbon emissions overall. We saw something similar recently when there was a period of calm wind during which we had to start burning Russian (and Australian etc) coal for power because of a lack of investment in domestic gas production and storage, more than doubling CO2 emissions for each kWh produced, not to mention the increased deaths associated with coal use.


----------



## killer b (Apr 24, 2022)

wow, I've not seen this meme so perfectly expressed in the wild for some time.


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I don’t know how they expect us to continue to use fossil fuel products without producing or investing in fossil fuels. Presumably they want us to import them instead but apparently that’s ok because someone upthread said they can’t be expected to protest against foreign stuff.



Off the top of my (drunken) head we could keep using those already open sources of hydrocarbons but very quickly reduce usage and decarbonize the economy and our lives, and not open any new fossil fuel sources. So continue to use for the short term, but drastically and swiftly reduce our medium and long term usage, and also not start any new production or investment is all entirely consistent and possible isn't it?


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

BassJunkie said:


> Well, isn't that the consequence of Just Stopping Oil? Perhaps I'm taking them too literally.



You do know that even if tomorrow morning at 9am 'we just stopped oil' those  things you mention would continue to exist and be used for many years right? Pointing out people are using them now is nothing but misplaced criticism at best, and falling into the trap of mirroring right wing climate denier criticism at worst.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Off the top of my (drunken) head we could keep using those already open sources of hydrocarbons but very quickly reduce usage and decarbonize the economy and our lives, and not open any new fossil fuel sources. So continue to use for the short term, but drastically and swiftly reduce our medium and long term usage, and also not start any new production or investment is all entirely consistent and possible isn't it?



The current plan to reach net zero envisages some oil and gas being needed until  then, and we can’t rely on existing North Sea production for this.

Is there anything you disagree with in this North Sea Transition Deal review document? How might it be improved by gluing yourself to a road?


----------



## LDC (Apr 24, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Is there anything you disagree with in this North Sea Transition Deal review document? How might it be improved by gluing yourself to a road?



Skimming the first bit, yes. Net Zero by 2050. That's too late, and net zero is too vague (there's been loads of criticism of that as a goal/demand). I imagine if I read further I'd find more pretty quickly.

But I think yes, the tactics like gluing yourself to a road are problematic and flawed, but we were discussing their demands (well actually their use of megaphones and wearing fluoro vest ffs) not their actions. I'm very critical of their actions, and other aspects of what they do and the way they do it.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 24, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Skimming the first bit, yes. Net Zero by 2050. That's too late, and net zero is too vague. I imagine if I read further I'd find more pretty quickly.



Sure, I already suggested protests should probably focus on the targets if anything. 



LynnDoyleCooper said:


> But I think yes, the tactics like gluing yourself to a road are problematic and flawed, but we were discussing their demands (well actually their use of megaphones and wearing fluoro vest ffs) not their actions. I'm very critical of their actions, and other aspects of what they do and the way they do it.



Their demand is problematic because it attacks something that is incorporated into the current net zero 2050 strategy and is necessary to achieve it. It’s thus actively counterproductive, like they’ve only read the headlines about all of this.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 24, 2022)

So you agree that Net Zero by 2050 is inadequate, but think Just Stop Oil, which hasn't signed up to Net Zero by 2050 and is in fact very critical of it in the group's official outline, should tone their demands down so the government can get on with achieving Net Zero by 2050?


----------



## Dystopiary (Apr 24, 2022)

Richard Madeley was an absolute dick trying to be clever with a guest environmental protestor recently. 
Lowri turner was awful as well.






Glenn Hustler


For anyone who might not be able to read the cartoon, the young woman says, "We need to change our way of life or we will all die." 
Madeley replies, "That's incredibly disruptive to our way of life though, don't you think?"


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 25, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> So you agree that Net Zero by 2050 is inadequate, but think Just Stop Oil, which hasn't signed up to Net Zero by 2050 and is in fact very critical of it in the group's official outline, should tone their demands down so the government can get on with achieving Net Zero by 2050?



I note to "eliminate fossil fuel use within 8 years" they only mention heat/power, agriculture and transport as targets for ending fossil fuel use. Probably why they're happy with non-energy and industrial use of fossil fuels e.g. plastics, manufacturing etc. Happy to "ban all air travel" but carry on with all the other inconvenient stuff. No answer for how that carries on when the supply dries up due to lack of investment.

Just Stop Oil is just another Roger Hallam vanity project: XR -> Insulate Britain -> Just Stop Oil .... going for easier targets each time in the hope of finally scoring a point - maybe that will be when they try and ban steam trains.


----------



## LDC (Apr 25, 2022)

So your criticism is in part they're not demanding enough, and demanding the wrong things, and their tactics are wrong, and they're a vanity project, and they don't have a clear vision of the future to replace all hydrocarbons, and that they're hypocrites, did I miss anything?

Do find it a bit funny and a bit sad that you think your criticisms are some killer points, when they read like something in the Daily Mail comments section written by a grumpy middle aged man after drinking a few too many sherries while watching Top Gear.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 25, 2022)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> So your criticism is in part they're not demanding enough, and demanding the wrong things, and their tactics are wrong, and they're a vanity project, and they don't have a clear vision of the future to replace all hydrocarbons, and that they're hypocrites, did I miss anything?



I'm sure there's plenty more.



LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Do find it a bit funny and a bit sad that you think your criticisms are some killer points, when they read like something in the Daily Mail comments section written by a grumpy middle aged man after drinking a few too many sherries while watching Top Gear.



That's the thing though, they're not "killer points" because this group are on such shaky ground that anyone can poke holes in them, yes even those terribly thick Daily Mail readers. Which is why their protests are worse than doing nothing.


----------



## LDC (Apr 25, 2022)

The thing is I suspect this criticism (not necessarily from you, but criticism of this type) would come _no matter what_ a group taking action on this topic was taking. Look at the cartoon a few posts above, it's _exactly _what happens time and time again, it's so boring and predictable. So it's not that I think the criticisms are 'thick', but that they're coming from a position of not liking the topic being addressed _at all_. And sometimes they even kid themselves that they think it's an important issue, just that nobody addressing it is ever doing it quite right/they way they think it should be done.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 25, 2022)

Any viewpoint on what to do can have holes poked in it, because it's a forced trade-off between lower standards of living now (immediate extraordinary action involving significant economic upheaval) and considerably lower standards later (trying to maintain current economic norms until they're permanently ripped up by extreme climate chaos). So either way the other side can go "you're asking the impossible" and dismiss the suggestion.

Just Oil's focus is not actually as extreme as all that tbh, the biggest outlier is no more planes which is hardly its top line. Mostly it's just pushing against additional oil extraction where it can reach decision makers, and in favour of power use reduction and renewables. Neither of those later two are seeing the government putting much effort in - hence in part its increased ongoing reliance on new extraction - so there's plenty of room for improvement and any successful pressure along those lines is potentially useful.

I agree with Lynn, your writing smacks far more strongly of "grumpy fart looks for excuse to rag on hippies" than it does of serious critique. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good rant about hippies, plus no argument here about Rodger Hallam being a damn fool. I don't think the criticism above hits the nail though.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 25, 2022)

2050 is an appropriate net zero deadline. It won't lead to mass genocide, Just Stop Oil's "research" is disingenuous as it bases it's dire predictions not on net zero by 2050 but on no measures being taken whatsoever. 

I despair for the young people being sucked into this egotist death cult.


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 25, 2022)

No, it isn't. The IPCC has been very clear that we need to be rapidly reducing carbon emissions globally by 2030 and at net minus zero (ie. actively reducing risk carbon levels) by 2050. Given that we know many countries won't get even close, the most responsible course from Britain involves doing considerably better than that average.

Egotistic it may be, but Just Oil is not a death  cult, in fact from the above it has a better handle on exactly how deadly the consequences are for letting the British government off at this moment than you do.


----------



## platinumsage (Apr 25, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> No, it isn't. The IPCC has been very clear that we need to be rapidly reducing carbon emissions globally by 2030 and at net minus zero (ie. Actively reducing risk carbon levels) by 2050.



Yeah they said emissions must peak by 2025, not that we should achieve net zero by 2025 as XR demand


----------



## Rob Ray (Apr 25, 2022)

_Global_ emissions. Meaning some countries will have to do much much better to make up for the ones which won't. It's not just some "hey do your share" one and done thing.


----------



## LDC (Apr 25, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I despair for the young people being sucked into this egotist death cult.



Jackpot!


----------



## Elpenor (Apr 28, 2022)

Just Stop Oil have been smashing pumps / spray painting them which is something I don’t remember them doing so far.









						Just Stop Oil protesters sabotage petrol pumps on M25 motorway
					

Environmental activists say action is ‘significant escalation’ in campaign against fuel distribution in England




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 8ball (Apr 28, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> Just Stop Oil have been smashing pumps / spray painting them which is something I don’t remember them doing so far.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Can verify.  Was just at the pub with my mate who is very involved with XR.  He doesn’t approve.


----------



## platinumsage (Jul 4, 2022)

Unable to maintain their campaign of disrupting infrastructure, they’ve now resorted to repeatedly targeting paintings:









						Just Stop Oil protesters glue themselves to Constable’s The Hay Wain in London’s National Gallery
					

Climate change protesters have attached their own image of "an apocalyptic vision of the future" to the frame of John Constable's masterpiece painting The Hay Wain.




					www.independent.ie


----------



## AverageJoe (Jul 4, 2022)

Yesterday's Silverstone Grand Prix


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 4, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> So to summarise, you don't like a direct action group because they use hyperbole and are only aiming to stop fossil fuel extraction in the area where they live and can potentially affect government decisions, rather than in Qatar and Nigeria, where they don't live and have no say at all in the matter. I can see your masterful strategies will serve you well in carrying out erm, whatever more effective plan you might have I guess. When you implement it.



I think a lot of them are naive self aggrandising arseholes.

Too fucking thick to realise that change cannot be instant.

Yes, we need to reduce carbon emissions, but we also need to heat our homes, wash our clothes and cook food. 

Until 100% reliable replacements are with us, gas and oil are needed. Wind can be a huge generator, but you cannot rely on it, and the cold still times are when heating is needed most.

I think they need to fuck off and fucking grow up.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 4, 2022)

I wonder if those in retirement are less panicked than those who are still in education.


----------



## Rob Ray (Jul 4, 2022)

No doubt some of the younger ones are naive, perhaps even a few of the older ones who haven't done any campaigning before. Even so, I think they can be forgiven for being more enthusiastic than practical - it's better than being a miserable canting defeatist, inasmuch as the former can learn and grow while the latter is fundamentally of no use to anyone.

But if you think campaigning for the impossible is about actually _getting_ the impossible you're a bigger fool than them. Pressure from campaigning is about forcing governments to go beyond what they pitch as the politically possible - and they always can.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 4, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> No doubt some of the younger ones are naive, perhaps even a few of the older ones who haven't done any campaigning before. Even so, I think they can be forgiven for being more enthusiastic than practical - it's better than being a miserable canting defeatist, inasmuch as the former can learn and grow while the latter is fundamentally of no use to anyone.
> 
> But if you think campaigning for the impossible is about actually _getting_ the impossible you're a bigger fool than them. Pressure from campaigning is about forcing governments to go beyond what they pitch as the politically possible - and they always can.



My post was a dig at Sas. Btw.


----------



## killer b (Jul 4, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I wonder if those in retirement are less panicked than those who are still in education.


My kid told me off for joking about how we'll all be eating irradiated rats for dinner in a decade the other day


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 4, 2022)

killer b said:


> My kid told me off for joking about how we'll all be eating irradiated rats for dinner in a decade the other day



He best learn some decent sauce recipes!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 4, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Unable to maintain their campaign of disrupting infrastructure, they’ve now resorted to repeatedly targeting paintings:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm now thinking it's more likely than not that these clowns are working for the government to discredit both environmentalism and direct action in general.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 9, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Unable to maintain their campaign of disrupting infrastructure, they’ve now resorted to repeatedly targeting paintings:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oil paintings tbf.


----------



## bcuster (Aug 27, 2022)




----------



## cybershot (Aug 27, 2022)

They've been back digging tunnels under roads to get to the oil depot near here. Complete madness tactics. Roads closed to ensure safe and then fill the tunnels back in with concrete!


----------



## extra dry (Sep 25, 2022)

Rashida Tlaib's questioning of bank executives, and how that directly leads to the climate inferno being protested by scientists today sept 2022, roughly 10 minutes long.


----------



## Karl Masks (Sep 25, 2022)

Wither XR?

All i see is JSO/Insulate Britain protesters being locked up and, thanks to cuts, languish in a black hole on remand. One of the things that must be done is to join up with these struggles work to find methods that dont' leave these people divided and screwed, because let's be honest these guys are fucked


----------



## ska invita (Sep 25, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Wither XR?
> 
> All i see is JSO/Insulate Britain protesters being locked up and, thanks to cuts, languish in a black hole on remand. One of the things that must be done is to join up with these struggles work to find methods that dont' leave these people divided and screwed, because let's be honest these guys are fucked


next actions from XR...building for spring 23 supposedly


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Wither XR?
> 
> All i see is JSO/Insulate Britain protesters being locked up and, thanks to cuts, languish in a black hole on remand. One of the things that must be done is to join up with these struggles work to find methods that dont' leave these people divided and screwed, because let's be honest these guys are fucked


This is a natural consequence of Roger hallam's plans which was eminently predictable


----------



## gosub (Sep 26, 2022)

extra dry said:


> Rashida Tlaib's questioning of bank executives, and how that directly leads to the climate inferno being protested by scientists today sept 2022, roughly 10 minutes long.






Current estimated cost of meeting Net zero 2050 US (who have the global reserve currency....as world currently constucted (oil based US denominated) $US12,000 per person per annum....


Transition can/does have to happen (we are past peak oil after all) but off the spin of how all this went down.....Rashida Tlaib is out of her depth


----------



## gosub (Sep 26, 2022)

The natural gas that isn't coming through Nordsream or Nordstream2.....thats a byproduct (as far as Russia is concerned) of Russian oil production....which can/will only stop if oil price around $60 (after all they are at Special military operations) and have limited amount of military equipment that doesn't need fuelling....so they burn the methane....

20 years ago I remember, concern was permafrost would thaw releasing a fuck tonneof methane.....lot of fires in Siberia last couple of years...

even if price of oil comes down to take Russia out of that equation. Educated guess, there will still be fires in Siberia


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Wither XR?
> 
> All i see is JSO/Insulate Britain protesters being locked up and, thanks to cuts, languish in a black hole on remand. One of the things that must be done is to join up with these struggles work to find methods that dont' leave these people divided and screwed, because let's be honest these guys are fucked



There’s a very porous membrane between JSO and XR.  It might serve them both well for it to appear less porous than it really is, too.


----------



## Karl Masks (Sep 27, 2022)

8ball said:


> There’s a very porous membrane between JSO and XR.  It might serve them both well for it to appear less porous than it really is, too.


I think Roger hallam is involved in both, or it might be insulate Britain, iirc


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> I think Roger hallam is involved in both, or it might be insulate Britain, iirc



He’s more involved with JSO right now (or was the last time I looked.
JSO and IB are the same people.


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 27, 2022)

8ball said:


> He’s more involved with JSO right now (or was the last time I looked.



That explains their failure then.


----------



## Karl Masks (Sep 27, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> That explains their failure then.


Well they are currently languishing in prison, so that explains his success then


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> That explains their failure then.



This post makes me wonder if things are going better for them than I thought.


----------



## Karl Masks (Sep 28, 2022)

gosub said:


> Current estimated cost of meeting Net zero 2050 US (who have the global reserve currency....as world currently constucted (oil based US denominated) $US12,000 per person per annum....
> 
> 
> Transition can/does have to happen (we are past peak oil after all) but off the spin of how all this went down.....Rashida Tlaib is out of her depth



What should she say or advocate?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> 2050 is an appropriate net zero deadline. It won't lead to mass genocide, Just Stop Oil's "research" is disingenuous as it bases it's dire predictions not on net zero by 2050 but on no measures being taken whatsoever.
> 
> I despair for the young people being sucked into this egotist death cult.


I mean I guess the one good thing I could say about this post is that at least you were calling it an "egotist death cult" some months before London literally went on fire.  _Uses Walter White voice_ So there's that.


----------



## platinumsage (Sep 30, 2022)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I mean I guess the one good thing I could say about this post is that at least you were calling it an "egotist death cult" some months before London literally went on fire.  _Uses Walter White voice_ So there's that.



Well, I’m “complicit in mass genocide”, as I assume are you, unless you glued yourself to something recently, so not sure either of us can morally participate in this discussion.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Well, I’m “complicit in mass genocide”, as I assume are you, unless you glued yourself to something recently, so not sure either of us can morally participate in this discussion.


I'll happily participate in it immorally. I'm a socialist, not a faacking vicar.


----------



## Serge Forward (Oct 1, 2022)

Dunno who did this but it's a Chevron ad, nicely detourned (as the situationists would have said).


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 1, 2022)

I assume End UK Private Jets is a front for the same crowd:


----------



## Indeliblelink (Oct 14, 2022)

They've thrown soup over van Gogh's Sunflowers painting.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 14, 2022)

Well I for one fully support this sort of action. Fuck the bourgeois art world.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 14, 2022)

Indeliblelink said:


> They've thrown soup over van Gogh's Sunflowers painting.




Just on the glass cover.
Media (and JSO tbf) reporting as if it was on the actual painting.

Not sure what point they are trying to make by attacking artworks.  Disrupting an oil company’s central office might make more sense.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 14, 2022)

attacking central office of an oil company is hard

attacking art is dead easy and cheap and generates publicity


----------



## 8ball (Oct 14, 2022)

Flavour said:


> attacking central office of an oil company is hard
> 
> attacking art is dead easy and cheap and generates publicity



It’s not great publicity, though.  Comes over as a pointless childish tantrum.

If they’d thrown some Campbell’s soup over that Warhol painting at least there’d be some situationist value to it.


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2022)

Indeliblelink said:


> They've thrown soup over van Gogh's Sunflowers painting.



It's protected by glass.


----------



## story (Oct 14, 2022)

8ball said:


> It’s not great publicity, though.  Comes over as a pointless childish tantrum.
> 
> If they’d thrown some Campbell’s soup over that Warhol painting at least there’d be some situationist value to it.



Yeah.

why soup?
why tomato soup?
why the sunflowers?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 14, 2022)

tomato soup cos it's like blood or something? dunno. i'm still in favor anyway.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 14, 2022)

If my blood looked like tomato soup, I'd be calling 111 because clearly something would be badly wrong.

Stupid and pointless action. I doubt anyone who cares about paintings is unaware of the climate issue. The oil companies certainly aren't gonna give a shit about it. They're not exactly making it the government's problem either.

What are these idiots going to do next, kick over sandcastles and trample over picnics because climate change is more important than either of those things? Pathetic way of seeking attention all round.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 14, 2022)

8ball said:


> It’s not great publicity, though.  Comes over as a pointless childish tantrum.
> 
> If they’d thrown some Campbell’s soup over that Warhol painting at least there’d be some situationist value to it.



If Banksy had done this the painting would have quadruped in price


----------



## killer b (Oct 14, 2022)

NoXion said:


> If my blood looked like tomato soup, I'd be calling 111 because clearly something would be badly wrong.
> 
> Stupid and pointless action. I doubt anyone who cares about paintings is unaware of the climate issue. The oil companies certainly aren't gonna give a shit about it. They're not exactly making it the government's problem either.
> 
> What are these idiots going to do next, kick over sandcastles and trample over picnics because climate change is more important than either of those things? Pathetic way of seeking attention all round.


These actions get them in the news, which is the reason for them I guess. The soup can be squeegeed off the glass that fronts the painting, so no actual damage done. pretty effective IMO


----------



## NoXion (Oct 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> These actions get them in the news, which is the reason for them I guess. The soup can be squeegeed off the glass that fronts the painting, so no actual damage done. pretty effective IMO



That hangs on the premise of all publicity being good publicity. That's a fallacy beloved of shit marketeers.

OK, so they get in the news. What then transpires from this brief period of attention? Because I doubt that fossil fuel companies are going to change their behaviour at all because of this. Why would they? It has literally nothing to do with them. Maybe these activists can get the government to do something if they keep doing things like this, but I'm pretty damn certain that any response would simply amount to more legislation against this kind of action. Is that the goal? Not seeing the point myself. If anything happens, then it will most likely involve increased security costs for galleries. OK, so that's more people and resources being directed somewhere they previously weren't, producing more carbon emissions along the way. Own goal much?

It seems like the activists didn't think much of this action beyond "get some attention". As if there's isn't already a constant drumbeat of articles and opinion pieces on the subject already. Hell, there's even an entire TV channel dedicated to the subject. Who could possibly be unaware at this point?


----------



## story (Oct 14, 2022)

Flavour said:


> tomato soup cos it's like blood or something? dunno. i'm still in favor anyway.




But it’s not a game of Would You Rather…

…live in a world without art, _*or*_ a world where we were no longer reliant on carbon based fuels.


Why can’t we have both?

I doubt the world would be a lesser place if Van Gogh had never existed, but he has enriched my life for sure, and I’m not the only person who can say this.

If we ever get to a place where oil is anachronistic, I still want art to be in that world.


Throwing food at art doesn’t strike me as useful.

Like that stupid protest a few weeks ago when a few vegans poured out pints and pints of posh milk all over Harrods Food Hall floor.


Direct action is a powerful tool and weapon when used well. When it’s applied like this it arguably devalues direct action as a whole.


----------



## story (Oct 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> These actions get them in the news, which is the reason for them I guess. The soup can be squeegeed off the glass that fronts the painting, so no actual damage done. pretty effective IMO



Not sure though.
This thread is about the very issues they wanted to highlight and yet we’re now chatting about tomato soup and art, not oil.

I reckon the news and any other discussion anywhere else will also be about soup and art, not oil


----------



## 8ball (Oct 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> These actions get them in the news, which is the reason for them I guess. The soup can be squeegeed off the glass that fronts the painting, so no actual damage done. pretty effective IMO



Effective, yeah.  But in the same way that Piers Morgan is effective.


----------



## Dystopiary (Oct 14, 2022)

The corporate press are more bothered by this than the planet being destroyed, of course they are. They know which side their bread's buttered.
I don't get why ordinary people are bothered by it. The painting's not even damaged. Maybe it's not the way I'd go about it but what am I currently doing?


----------



## killer b (Oct 14, 2022)

They sprayed a load of paint on the scotland yard sign too


----------



## Dystopiary (Oct 14, 2022)

Part of their latest press release quotes the two young people involved. 



> Phoebe Plummer, 21, from London  said:
> 
> _“Is art worth more than life? More than food? More than justice?
> 
> ...



Just Stop Oil supporters throw soup over Van Gogh’s Sunflowers to demand no new oil and gas. – Just Stop Oil


----------



## pogofish (Oct 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> My kid told me off for joking about how we'll all be eating irradiated rats for dinner in a decade the other day



Remind him that a significant percentage of U.K. food being sold today is already irradiated - incl fish, chicken, fruit and veg.









						Irradiated food
					

Irradiation of food is a practice which eliminates bacteria that may lead to food poisoning. This page details the irradiation process and how it is not harmful to consumers.




					www.food.gov.uk
				




Last time I saw a figure it was a little under 30% but that may have been a global estimate. It is much higher in some product types eg packet/pre-cooked rice, where it must be closer to 100%


----------



## killer b (Oct 14, 2022)

pogofish said:


> Remind him


her on this occasion


----------



## bcuster (Oct 14, 2022)

killer b said:


> They sprayed a load of paint on the scotland yard sign too


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

bcuster said:


>





What glue??


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

story said:


> Yeah.
> 
> why soup?
> why tomato soup?
> why the sunflowers?





NoXion said:


> If my blood looked like tomato soup, I'd be calling 111 because clearly something would be badly wrong.
> 
> Stupid and pointless action. I doubt anyone who cares about paintings is unaware of the climate issue. The oil companies certainly aren't gonna give a shit about it. They're not exactly making it the government's problem either.
> 
> What are these idiots going to do next, kick over sandcastles and trample over picnics because climate change is more important than either of those things? Pathetic way of seeking attention all round.


What do you realistically suggest instead?

I can feel the sense of anger and frustration that these people have. We're literally looking at the deaths of millions, if not billions of people, total destruction of entire ecosystems, the collapse of civilisations, all for the profit of a few oil company execs, and it feels like no one gives a fuck.

No one else is doing shit, so I've got no right to criticise their actions, unless I'm stepping up and doing something better - which I'm not.


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> What glue??


Pritstick as it biodegrades fairly quickly


----------



## bcuster (Oct 14, 2022)

the protester on the right had a glue stick


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> Pritstick as it biodegrades fairly quickly




Just wondered if they even checked that the glue they used had no petroleum based chemicals or petrochemical derivatives.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

bcuster said:


> the protester on the right had a glue stick



Looks to me like the glue was in a rube that required that the top be unscrewed and used to punch into the top of the tube to open it.... so its probably a super glue type


----------



## 8ball (Oct 14, 2022)

Yeah, I wouldn’t have expected it to be Pritt stick.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> What do you realistically suggest instead?



Blow up an oil pipeline.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> Pritstick as it biodegrades fairly quickly


as opposed to pritistik which fucks up everything it comes into contact with


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Just wondered if they even checked that the glue they used had no petroleum based chemicals or petrochemical derivatives.


They're clearly absolute hypocrites then. I bet they got to the gallery via a train using diesel, or their bike tyres had petrochemical by-products in them.

We're stuck in a world where everything has got a cost to the environment for the benefits of profit. It doesn't mean you can't strive for better.


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

8ball said:


> Blow up an oil pipeline.


They're only young and might not have the contacts. Have you got any C4 ready?

Maybe its best to continue via PM


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> Just wondered if they even checked that the glue they used had no petroleum based chemicals or petrochemical derivatives.


Don't be a twat.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 14, 2022)

I am assisting Just Stop Oil by spoiling this Urban75 post. The mess I've caused below is nothing compared to the destruction of our planet:


----------



## weltweit (Oct 14, 2022)

Good on them for making a protest, glad the picture was glass covered so didn't actually get destroyed. Glad they glued themselves as that probably gave time for the media to get involved. Good event I would say.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

editor said:


> Don't be a twat.



Wasn't being a twat...??


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I am assisting Just Stop Oil by spoiling this Urban75 post. The mess I've caused below is nothing compared to the destruction of our planet:
> 
> View attachment 347204


I hope this post makes the news, otherwise I feel your time may have been wasted


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> They're clearly absolute hypocrites then. I bet they got to the gallery via a train using diesel, or their bike tyres had petrochemical by-products in them.
> 
> We're stuck in a world where everything has got a cost to the environment for the benefits of profit. It doesn't mean you can't strive for better.



I don't subscribe to throwing soup at art...
Better ways to stop using oil...


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> I don't subscribe to throwing soup at art...
> Better ways to stop using oil...


By choosing the correct glue?


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> By choosing the correct glue?




By knowing what they are using.
By understanding what petroleum is and where it is. 


They're probably wearing clothes and shoes made from recycled plastic originally petrochemical based.  

Petroleum / oil is in so much more of our everyday use...even if we dont use cars or any form of petrol powered engine/ turbine..

Our world is full of oil based products. 









						What Is Oil Used For | Uses for Oil and Petroleum Products
					

Oil is an important part of daily life in Canada and the world. Oil is used to move us, heat our homes, and make everyday consumer products. Learn how oil is used.




					www.capp.ca
				




More than 6,000 everyday products get their start from oil, including dishwashing liquid, solar panels, food preservatives, eyeglasses, DVDs, children’s toys, tires and heart valves. Here are some of the common petroleum products that are an important part of our modern lifestyle.

Electronics​Due to insulating and heat resistant properties, plastics and other petroleum-based products are used in electronic components. From your speakers and *smartphones* to your computers, cameras, and televisions, most electronics have components derived from oil.
Textiles​Clothing is commonly made from petroleum-based fibers including acrylic, rayon, vegan leather, polyester, nylon and spandex. Even *shoes* and purses use petrochemicals for their lightweight, durable, and water resistant properties.
Sporting Goods​Many common *sports equipment* contains some petroleum including basketballs, golf balls and bags, football helmets, surfboards, skis, tennis rackets and fishing rods.
Health & Beauty Products​Many of our personal care products are derived from petroleum including perfume, hair dye, cosmetics (lipstick, makeup, foundation, eyeshadow, mascara, eyeliner), hand lotion, toothpaste, *soap*, shaving cream, deodorant, panty hose, combs, shampoo, eyeglasses, and *contact lenses*.
Medical Supplies​Modern health care relies on petroleum products that have few substitutes. Plastics are used in a wide-range of *medical devices* and petrochemicals are relied on for *pharmaceuticals.* Products include hospital equipment, IV bags, aspirin, antihistamines, artificial limbs, dentures, hearing aids, heart valves and many more.
Household Products​Our homes are full of *products that used petroleum* in their production. From construction materials such as roofing and housing insulation to linoleum flooring, furniture, appliances and home decor such as pillows, curtains, rugs, and house paint. Even many everyday kitchen items including dishes, cups, non-stick pans, and dish detergent use oil in their creation.
Made from Oil and natural Gas
​How Many Petroleum Products Did You Use Today?​


----------



## nogojones (Oct 14, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> By knowing what they are using.
> By understanding what petroleum is and where it is.
> 
> 
> ...


No shit. I've learnt something today.

I look forward to seeing all those wonderful things float past me when I'm flooded by the inevitable rising sea water and think fondly of my non-stick pan when I hear of famines due to drought and floods.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 14, 2022)

nogojones said:


> No shit. I've learnt something today.
> 
> I look forward to seeing all those wonderful things float past me when I'm flooded by the inevitable rising sea water and think fondly of my non-stick pan when I hear of famines due to drought and floods.




Sadly there is nothing we can do to stop it.
Its fucking depressing...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 14, 2022)

These people must be paid stooges for oil companies. There is no other explanation for these fucking absurd 'actions'. If their whole point is that oil is everywhere, then it shouldn't be hard to pick a legitimate fucking target should it? Pretty much anything really. Anything except the cultural heritage of the civilisation they claim to be trying to protect. Twats.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 16, 2022)

nogojones said:


> What do you realistically suggest instead?
> 
> I can feel the sense of anger and frustration that these people have. We're literally looking at the deaths of millions, if not billions of people, total destruction of entire ecosystems, the collapse of civilisations, all for the profit of a few oil company execs, and it feels like no one gives a fuck.
> 
> No one else is doing shit, so I've got no right to criticise their actions, unless I'm stepping up and doing something better - which I'm not.



Well there was this action: Just Stop Oil protesters spray Aston Martin showroom in London's Park Lane with orange paint

Which had they asked me, I would have advised leading with instead. I think trashing luxury cars is going to resonate with more people than splashing soup on a painting. The rich are going to be better cushioned from the effects of climate change after all, so this kind of action has the sense of redress about it. As opposed to what comes across as a feeble attempt to trash a painting by an artist who had nothing to do with climate change, and who is well-regarded by all sorts of people, not just the rich.

I also reject this idea that actions can't be criticised. If "no else is doing shit", then that doesn't justify crap actions that achieve nothing but grab some attention in a way that can be easily twisted into childish attention-seeking. You could justify doing anything by that kind of reasoning.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 16, 2022)

Since their main unmet demand is to replace parliament with a citizens assembly they should probably chain themselves to the entrance to Portcullis House or something, or go around with a megaphone drowning out MP interviews like that stop brexit guy.

Oh wait that's Extinction Rebellion.

Just Stop Oil simply want the government to stop issuing new fossil fuel consents. That's the North Sea Transition Authority. Have they targetted their offices yet? One in London one in Aberdeen:









						Contacts
					






					www.nstauthority.co.uk


----------



## ddraig (Oct 16, 2022)

Who is your whattabouterry and hypocrisy hunting helping Aladdin ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2022)

NoXion said:


> Well there was this action: Just Stop Oil protesters spray Aston Martin showroom in London's Park Lane with orange paint
> 
> Which had they asked me, I would have advised leading with instead. I think trashing luxury cars is going to resonate with more people than splashing soup on a painting. The rich are going to be better cushioned from the effects of climate change after all, so this kind of action has the sense of redress about it. As opposed to what comes across as a feeble attempt to trash a painting by an artist who had nothing to do with climate change, and who is well-regarded by all sorts of people, not just the rich.
> 
> I also reject this idea that actions can't be criticised. If "no else is doing shit", then that doesn't justify crap actions that achieve nothing but grab some attention in a way that can be easily twisted into childish attention-seeking. You could justify doing anything by that kind of reasoning.


Yeh how dare people condemn putin without putting troops into the field themselves


----------



## Karl Masks (Oct 16, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> These people must be paid stooges for oil companies. There is no other explanation for these fucking absurd 'actions'. If their whole point is that oil is everywhere, then it shouldn't be hard to pick a legitimate fucking target should it? Pretty much anything really. Anything except the cultural heritage of the civilisation they claim to be trying to protect. Twats.


Throwing soup at a Van Gogh does seem uniquely pathetic. 

Somoneo somewhere pointed out that Van Gogh was someone who was subject to oppression in his own life. So well done. That may have been said here, I don't know, I'm very tired


----------



## BristolEcho (Oct 16, 2022)

bcuster said:


>



That "seeecurity?" Makes me laugh every time.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 16, 2022)

ddraig said:


> Who is your whattabouterry and hypocrisy hunting helping Aladdin ?



Ah...you presumed.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 16, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh how dare people condemn putin without putting troops into the field themselves



I’m not sure that someone condemning Putin by e.g. flicking water at their cat should be immune to criticism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I’m not sure that someone condemning Putin by e.g. flicking water at their cat should be immune to criticism.


There's a lot of things you're not sure on


----------



## Shechemite (Oct 16, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> That "seeecurity?" Makes me laugh every time.



Not as good as the initial ‘wurrrgghh’ reaction


----------



## bcuster (Oct 17, 2022)

Reddit loves these folks,,,


----------



## BristolEcho (Oct 17, 2022)

bcuster said:


> Reddit loves these folks,,,



Reception to that one was a bit better.


----------



## bcuster (Oct 17, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> Reception to that one was a bit better.


The Aston martin protest actually makes some sense...


----------



## tommers (Oct 17, 2022)

Shut the Dartford Crossing now.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

tommers said:


> Shut the Dartford Crossing now.



I’m not sure how they did that.  They’re high up on it, aren’t they?

I guess they could fall off and land on a car…


----------



## tommers (Oct 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> I’m not sure how they did that.  They’re high up on it, aren’t they?
> 
> I guess they could fall off and land on a car…


I guess having people suspended over fast moving traffic is seen as some kind of health and safety risk by the woke brigade.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

tommers said:


> I guess having people suspended over fast moving traffic is seen as some kind of health and safety risk by the woke brigade.



Well, if they’re high enough up, the traffic is no risk to them.  It’s just that they’re a possible risk to the traffic.

Maybe put up a sign saying “Possible falling Tarquins” and let people make their own decision.


----------



## Karl Masks (Oct 17, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> Reception to that one was a bit better.


mask up mate!

i mean the person in the clip


----------



## bmd (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> I'd say that both can be useful, but if I had to pick one definition, then I'd go with option c, social relationship. If you want to pull out some stats about how many truck drivers own their own trucks and go for an argument about means of production and petit-bourgeois artisans or something, then you can do that, but I still dunno if it'd be a very good use of a bank holiday afternoon. But wages are a pretty weak argument, unless you do the same thing with tube drivers?


I've never read any theories on class so you'll have to forgive me but are you saying that if Julie, works on the tills at Tesco, became best friends with Jane, barrister then Julie would leave her working class status behind?


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

bmd said:


> I've never read any theories on class so you'll have to forgive me but are you saying that if Julie, works on the tills at Tesco, became best friends with Jane, barrister then Julie would leave her working class status behind?


Not quite, I'm saying that working on the tills at Tesco is a social relationship.


----------



## bmd (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Not quite, I'm saying that working on the tills at Tesco is a social relationship.


 So if you work with working class people you're working class, is that what you mean?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 17, 2022)

Seeing a lot of push back about them being funded by big oil.

I still root for the buggers on the sharp end though, what’s not funded by big oil?


----------



## xenon (Oct 17, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> These people must be paid stooges for oil companies. There is no other explanation for these fucking absurd 'actions'. If their whole point is that oil is everywhere, then it shouldn't be hard to pick a legitimate fucking target should it? Pretty much anything really. Anything except the cultural heritage of the civilisation they claim to be trying to protect. Twats.



Yep. Apparently though, this makes you a middle aged bore who just hates the kids man.


----------



## pogofish (Oct 17, 2022)

They seem to have put the wind-up the denizens of a certain US-based travel board well enough - Tins of Tomato Soup = NO AMERICAN IS SAFE IN LONDON  



> Do you really feel safe in museums and other public institutions
> London? If metal soup cans make it in, anything can.



Apart those who commented on their demonstration of an extreme lack of taste by using Heinz Soup, instead of the much more artistically appropriate Campbells product.  There is hope!


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

bmd said:


> So if you work with working class people you're working class, is that what you mean?


Not exactly, apart from anything else that'd be a bit circular, it's closer to "if you work for a living you're working class". When I say "social relationship" in the context of arguments about class, perhaps "power relationship" would be a clearer term - if you spend most of your working day taking orders from other people you're working class, if you spend most of your working day giving orders to other people you're a boss, kind of thing.


----------



## bmd (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Not exactly, apart from anything else that'd be a bit circular, it's closer to "if you work for a living you're working class". When I say "social relationship" in the context of arguments about class, perhaps "power relationship" would be a clearer term - if you spend most of your working day taking orders from other people you're working class, if you spend most of your working day giving orders to other people you're a boss, kind of thing.


Interesting. Power makes more sense to me. I will come back on the rest when it has percolated through.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

Anyway, on the action itself, I'm pretty firmly on the fence. I can't really claim to be particularly upset by some soup getting on some glass, but at the same time it would be nice if they did something a bit more materially disruptive to actual fossil fuel infrastructure? The conspiracy theories are obviously stupid though. 
This seems a bit more like the kind of thing everyone can get behind, got a lot less publicity though:




__





						10/10/2022: All front windows broken at Schlumberger’s Cambridge fossil fuel research centre – This Is Not A Drill.
					






					www.thisisnotadrill.uk


----------



## LDC (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Not exactly, apart from anything else that'd be a bit circular, it's closer to "if you work for a living you're working class". When I say "social relationship" in the context of arguments about class, perhaps "power relationship" would be a clearer term - if you spend most of your working day taking orders from other people you're working class, if you spend most of your working day giving orders to other people you're a boss, kind of thing.



I'm much less sure about that second definition without a load more nuance/context; where I work that 'giving orders' could include senior nurses and all sorts of other HCPs for example.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Anyway, on the action itself, I'm pretty firmly on the fence. I can't really claim to be particularly upset by some soup getting on some glass, but at the same time it would be nice if they did something a bit more materially disruptive to actual fossil fuel infrastructure? The conspiracy theories are obviously stupid though.
> This seems a bit more like the kind of thing everyone can get behind, got a lot less publicity though:
> 
> 
> ...



I can’t agree that action is useful. As I said, because their only demand is for the government to stop issuing new fossil fuel consents, they ought to target the government or the North Sea Transition Authority which are solely responsibly for that.

A fossil fuel services company isn’t going to stop servicing fossil fuel production due to some protesters, they’d have to basically liquidate themselves and go home. And anyone who thinks that abandoning investment in fossil fuel infrastructure and services will lead to a cleaner and quicker wind-down of fossil fuel use is just ignorant - it will lead to greater inefficiency and increased risks of disasters such as oil leaks.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

LDC said:


> I'm much less sure about that second definition without a load more nuance/context; where I work that 'giving orders' could include senior nurses and all sorts of other HCPs for example.


Fair point, but I was trying to give a short one-sentence definition of what class as a social relationship means and not spend all day writing a more accurate post that would be unreadably long. Can you come up with an equally concise but more accurate way of putting it? (That's not a dig or a snarky rhetorical question, I think clear and simple introductions to these kinds of concepts are a good thing and I'd like to see more of them, if you can think of a better one I may well nick it and use it in future.)


platinumsage said:


> I can’t agree that action is useful. As I said, because their only demand is for the government to stop issuing new fossil fuel consents, they ought to target the government or the North Sea Transition Authority which are solely responsibly for that.
> 
> A fossil fuel services company isn’t going to stop servicing fossil fuel production due to some protesters, they’d have to basically liquidate themselves and go home. And anyone who thinks that abandoning investment in fossil fuel infrastructure and services will lead to a cleaner and quicker wind-down of fossil fuel use is just ignorant - it will lead to greater inefficiency and increased risks of disasters such as oil leaks.


Well, while I posted it on this thread it's not actually a JSO action, so the "one demand" point is less relevant here. Arguably that's on me for posting it on this thread when it's not a JSO action, but when we have existing XR and JSO threads, setting up a third thread for "actions against fossil fuel infrastructure taken by anonymous activists not affiliated with any named group" would seem a bit redundant.
And yeah, getting them to liquidate themselves and go home is sort of the point, I don't think there's a way to ending fossil fuel use that fossil fuel services companies are going to be happy with. But OK, I'm happy to rephrase my point above as "the kind of thing everyone can get behind, provided they see fossil fuel extraction companies as legitimate targets and not vital partners in the fight against climate change."


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Fair point, but I was trying to give a short one-sentence definition of what class as a social relationship means and not spend all day writing a more accurate post that would be unreadably long. Can you come up with an equally concise but more accurate way of putting it? (That's not a dig or a snarky rhetorical question, I think clear and simple introductions to these kinds of concepts are a good thing and I'd like to see more of them, if you can think of a better one I may well nick it and use it in future.)
> 
> Well, while I posted it on this thread it's not actually a JSO action, so the "one demand" point is less relevant here. Arguably that's on me for posting it on this thread when it's not a JSO action, but when we have existing XR and JSO threads, setting up a third thread for "actions against fossil fuel infrastructure taken by anonymous activists not affiliated with any named group" would seem a bit redundant.
> And yeah, getting them to liquidate themselves and go home is sort of the point, I don't think there's a way to ending fossil fuel use that fossil fuel services companies are going to be happy with. But OK, I'm happy to rephrase my point above as "the kind of thing everyone can get behind, provided they see fossil fuel extraction companies as legitimate targets and not vital partners in the fight against climate change."



No, it's not what they should be doing and it's shit politics. If you want the last of our fossil fuels to come from ailing infrastructure in developing countries with massive environmental costs associated with frequent oil spills, dumping, methane burning and other negative externalities maybe. But I think most people would support it being done in a clean and efficient manner as possible.

Targeting random fossil fuel infrastructure at this point in time when a moment's thought will identify better targets is just a wankers game tbh.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> No, it's not what they should be doing and it's shit politics. If you want the last of our fossil fuels to come from ailing infrastructure in developing countries with massive environmental costs associated with frequent oil spills, dumping, methane burning and other negative externalities maybe. But I think most people would support it being done in a clean and efficient manner as possible.
> 
> Targeting random fossil fuel infrastructure at this point in time when a moment's thought will identify better targets is just a wankers game tbh.


Go on then, what targets do you have in mind? Hopefully not Sunflowers, that's already been done.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Go on then, what targets do you have in mind? Hopefully not Sunflowers, that's already been done.



I already said upthread.

Looking forward to Animal Rebellion's new protest going around snatching BLT sandwiches out of the hands of street sleepers.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

Good point, targeting street sleepers is basically exactly the same thing as targeting an oilfield drilling company, our valiant allies in the fight against climate change.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Anyway, on the action itself, I'm pretty firmly on the fence. I can't really claim to be particularly upset by some soup getting on some glass, but at the same time it would be nice if they did something a bit more materially disruptive to actual fossil fuel infrastructure? The conspiracy theories are obviously stupid though.
> This seems a bit more like the kind of thing everyone can get behind, got a lot less publicity though:
> 
> 
> ...




They do






						Protesters continue to block UK oil terminals despite more than 100 arrests | Environmental activism | The Guardian
					

Just Stop Oil activists have been climbing on to tankers and glueing themselves to roads since Friday




					amp.theguardian.com


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2022)

LDC said:


> I'm much less sure about that second definition without a load more nuance/context; where I work that 'giving orders' could include senior nurses and all sorts of other HCPs for example.


Perhaps 'is your role giving orders, eg captain mainwaring, taking and giving orders, eg Sgt Wilson, or taking orders eg private pike'


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> Seeing a lot of push back about them being funded by big oil.



JSO are funded by big oil?


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> JSO are funded by big oil?


Just Stop Oil are funded by the Climate Emergency Fund, which was founded by Aileen Getty, who comes from an oil money family. Which could mean that there are some individual people who are born into rich and powerful families who feel bad about it and give (some of) their money away to good causes, or it could mean that anyone who uses any tactics that I don't personally approve of is actually a false flag stooge of capital and the state. Feel free to apply Occam's Razor here. I'm also not convinced that Marx being funded by Big Cotton tells you much about the content of Marxism, really.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Just Stop Oil are funded by the Climate Emergency Fund, which was founded by Aileen Getty, who comes from an oil money family. Which could mean that there are some individual people who are born into rich and powerful families who feel bad about it and give (some of) their money away to good causes, or it could mean that anyone who uses any tactics that I don't personally approve of is actually a false flag stooge of capital and the state. Feel free to apply Occam's Razor here. I'm also not convinced that Marx being funded by Big Cotton tells you much about the content of Marxism, really.



This is too many layers of thinking for me.
I'm going to blame George Soros. 
Maybe Bill Gates is in on it too...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Just Stop Oil are funded by the Climate Emergency Fund, which was founded by Aileen Getty, who comes from an oil money family. Which could mean that there are some individual people who are born into rich and powerful families who feel bad about it and give (some of) their money away to good causes, or it could mean that anyone who uses any tactics that I don't personally approve of is actually a false flag stooge of capital and the state. Feel free to apply Occam's Razor here. I'm also not convinced that Marx being funded by Big Cotton tells you much about the content of Marxism, really.




This.

Some of the breathless replies tweeting about imply the Getty lady/Shell personally fracks yer Nan rather than being a rather messed up but well off philanthropist


----------



## LDC (Oct 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> JSO are funded by big oil?



No.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

LDC said:


> No.



Well, that's disappointing.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Just Stop Oil are funded by the Climate Emergency Fund, which was founded by Aileen Getty, who comes from an oil money family. Which could mean that there are some individual people who are born into rich and powerful families who feel bad about it and give (some of) their money away to good causes, or it could mean that anyone who uses any tactics that I don't personally approve of is actually a false flag stooge of capital and the state. Feel free to apply Occam's Razor here. I'm also not convinced that Marx being funded by Big Cotton tells you much about the content of Marxism, really.



I'm sure there's no nuance between those two extremes and the Tories taking money from Russian oligarchs or Shell funding the Science Museum or whatever is also totally fine. 

Of course Occam's Razor says the protestors are egotistical idiots, but let's not criticise them directly right?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Of course Occam's Razor says the protestors are egotistical idiots, but let's not criticise them directly right?



On the nuance front, it's always possible that they are egotistical idiots who have a point.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> This.
> 
> Some of the breathless replies tweeting about imply the Getty lady/Shell personally fracks yer Nan rather than being a rather messed up but well off philanthropist


Yeah, I really shouldn't be surprised by this point, but it is always disappointing to see how quickly people jump to "these people did something I personally disagree with therefore they must be working for the enemy" rather than "these people did something I disagree with, perhaps some of their perspectives on how to achieve our shared goals are different to mine."


platinumsage said:


> I'm sure there's no nuance between those two extremes and the Tories taking money from Russian oligarchs or Shell funding the Science Museum or whatever is also totally fine.
> 
> Of course Occam's Razor says the protestors are egotistical idiots, but let's not criticise them directly right?


I wonder if there's any difference between Shell _as an institution_ and an individual who happened to be born into a wealthy family with oil money?

I'm happy for people to criticise them, I would just prefer it if people could keep the criticisms to vaguely sensible ones. Do you think that the protesters are egotistical idiots who are knowingly or unknowingly working in the interests of the oil industry, according to the instructions of Aileen Getty? Or do we actually agree that that particular line of criticism is asinine, and you're just trying to invent a disagreement where there isn't one because you got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning?


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Yeah, I really shouldn't be surprised by this point, but it is always disappointing to see how quickly people jump to "these people did something I personally disagree with therefore they must be working for the enemy" rather than "these people did something I disagree with, perhaps some of their perspectives on how to achieve our shared goals are different to mine."
> 
> I wonder if there's any difference between Shell _as an institution_ and an individual who happened to be born into a wealthy family with oil money?
> 
> I'm happy for people to criticise them, I would just prefer it if people could keep the criticisms to vaguely sensible ones. Do you think that the protesters are egotistical idiots who are knowingly or unknowingly working in the interests of the oil industry, according to the instructions of Aileen Getty? Or do we actually agree that that particular line of criticism is asinine, and you're just trying to invent a disagreement where there isn't one because you got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning?



I haven't criticised JSO for taking money from Aileen Getty, I was just surprised at your implication that individual philanthropic funding of a protest movement wouldn't come with any strings, implied or otherwise, related to the nature of the resultant protests, and that the protesters are either entirely free agents or false flag provocateurs with no nuance in between. 

I think my criticisms have been entirely sensible, as I've only criticised their tactics and demands. Sure, this has led me to question their personal motivations, but that doesn't seem unreasonable given what they're doing.


----------



## muscovyduck (Oct 17, 2022)

I've noticed from irl and elsewhere on the internet the way people have reacted to it seems to have a lot to do with what filter bubble they're in. For example all my leftie tiktok obsessive mates are sure it's fake but aren't talking about it unless someone else brings it up. Whereas my mates who were vocal remain voters and have Twitter are being very vocally critical of it.

I am also incredibly frustrated with the whole "I disagree so it's a conspiracy" theme because not only is it conspiraloony but it also fundamentally misunderstands conspiracy theories, what the aims of sabotage is in radical movements and how to counteract it


----------



## LDC (Oct 17, 2022)

muscovyduck said:


> For example all my leftie tiktok obsessive mates are sure it's fake but aren't talking about it unless someone else brings it up.



What?! People think the chucking soup was fake? Like fake what? A hologram, fake soup, people in the pay of others, wtf?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2022)

LDC said:


> What?! People think the chucking soup was fake? Like fake what? A hologram, fake soup, people in the pay of others, wtf?


fake soup


----------



## LDC (Oct 17, 2022)

Tomato soup can't melt fine art, boils at too low a temperature. #doyourresearch


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

muscovyduck said:


> I've noticed from irl and elsewhere on the internet the way people have reacted to it seems to have a lot to do with what filter bubble they're in. For example all my leftie tiktok obsessive mates are sure it's fake but aren't talking about it unless someone else brings it up. Whereas my mates who were vocal remain voters and have Twitter are being very vocally critical of it.
> 
> I am also incredibly frustrated with the whole "I disagree so it's a conspiracy" theme because not only is it conspiraloony but it also fundamentally misunderstands conspiracy theories, what the aims of sabotage is in radical movements and how to counteract it


Yeah, what I'm finding insanely frustrating is that, if you look to see who was first involved in taking up and pushing the "BIG OIL FUNDS JSO" idea, you find:

So all the people taking up and amplifying this Fox News talking point seem to believe that Just Stop Oil is a pawn of the oil industry, but Fox News is just... neutrally putting the facts out there, or helpfully coming to the rescue of the climate movement by helping them identify this impostor, or something?


----------



## muscovyduck (Oct 17, 2022)

LDC said:


> What?! People think the chucking soup was fake? Like fake what? A hologram, fake soup, people in the pay of others, wtf?


The first time someone said it they said it with such conviction I just believed them and didn't ask what they meant. After that I started asking and they think they're actors paid by oil people.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Yeah, what I'm finding insanely frustrating is that, if you look to see who was first involved in taking up and pushing the "BIG OIL FUNDS JSO" idea, you find:
> View attachment 347594
> So all the people taking up and amplifying this Fox News talking point seem to believe that Just Stop Oil is a pawn of the oil industry, but Fox News is just... neutrally putting the facts out there, or helpfully coming to the rescue of the climate movement by helping them identify this impostor, or something?



It's just about making noise to obscure the message.


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

A little explainer on this stupidness here:








						Just Stop Oil, tomato soup, and Aileen Getty: How a climate protest turned into a TikTok conspiracy
					

Just Stop Oil’s most recent protest has got the internet wondering if the climate change organisation is actually funded by Big Oil.




					screenshot-media.com
				



It seems like people on tiktok will literally believe anything.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

The reason conspiracy theories are appearing suggesting they are a front designed to portray actual protestors negatively is that they are actually portraying actual protestors negatively by chucking soup over artworks instead of, you know, protesting against fossil fuel stuff.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> It seems like people on tiktok


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 17, 2022)

story said:


> Direct action is a powerful tool and weapon when used well. When it’s applied like this it arguably devalues direct action as a whole.


Pet peeve but the art stuff/Scotland yard *isn't *direct action.
It is quite specifically indirect action, a propaganda stunt to push governments, institutions, the public, etc to do something.
Actions that involve civil disobedience are not necessarily direct action, and likewise direct action can can be entirely legal and not involve and civil disobedience.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

redsquirrel said:


> Pet peeve but the art stuff/Scotland yard *isn't *direct action.
> It is quite specifically indirect action, a propaganda stunt to push governments, institutions, the public, etc to do something.
> Actions that involve civil disobedience are not necessarily direct action, and likewise direct action can can be entirely legal and not involve and civil disobedience.



Pedantic but fair.  Can also see story 's point.


----------



## killer b (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> A little explainer on this stupidness here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it's not just people on tiktok is it though tbf, even on forums of intellectual vigour like these we have to play constant whack-a-mole with idiots eating whatever the latest stupid theory coursing through the internet is


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 17, 2022)

TBH it was not really directed at story, it is just red rag to a bull when civil disobedience stunts like this get labelled direct action. One of those things that just does my head in.


----------



## story (Oct 17, 2022)

Yeah, fair point.

I should have put _direct action_ in quote marks.

It kind of proves my point: that this kind of ersatz nonsense undermines proper direct action.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

redsquirrel said:


> TBH it was not really directed at story, it is just red rag to a bull when civil disobedience stunts like this get labelled direct action. One of those things that just does my head in.



One for dlr's rage thread?


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The reason conspiracy theories are appearing suggesting they are a front designed to portray actual protestors negatively is that they are actually portraying actual protestors negatively by chucking soup over artworks instead of, you know, protesting against fossil fuel stuff.


I mean, when it comes to "protesting against fossil fuel stuff", you have said on this very thread that:


platinumsage said:


> Targeting random fossil fuel infrastructure... is just a wankers game tbh.


So I'll take your opinions on the value of "protesting against fossil fuel stuff" with a grain of salt there. But more importantly, I'm interested in why it is that people go from "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be a front for Big Oil" rather than "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be people who have views I disagree with on what the best ways to acheive our shared goals are?" This is the part that actually interests me, why is it that people find it easier to believe half-baked conspiracy theories than to accept that there are people who genuinely prefer different tactics and strategies?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> I mean, when it comes to "protesting against fossil fuel stuff", you have said on this very thread that:
> 
> So I'll take your opinions on the value of "protesting against fossil fuel stuff" with a grain of salt there. But more importantly, I'm interested in why it is that people go from "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be a front for Big Oil" rather than "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be people who have views I disagree with on what the best ways to acheive our shared goals are?" This is the part that actually interests me, why is it that people find it easier to believe half-baked conspiracy theories than to accept that there are people who genuinely prefer different tactics and strategies?



#201 is still my guess.

That and the filter bubble thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The reason conspiracy theories are appearing suggesting they are a front designed to portray actual protestors negatively is that they are actually portraying actual protestors negatively by chucking soup over artworks instead of, you know, protesting against fossil fuel stuff.


The fact it's an oil painting wooshed high over your head


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> The fact it's an oil painting wooshed high over your head



I'm sure these people were sufficiently educated to know that Van Gogh used poppyseed and linseed oil in his paint.
They will have attacked the painting due to the occasional addition of paraffin wax to the linseed oil.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> I'm sure these people were sufficiently educated to know that Van Gogh used poppyseed and linseed oil in his paint.
> They will have attacked the painting due to the occasional addition of paraffin wax to the linseed oil.


Yes, I forgot you wrote your doctoral thesis on van gogh's use of seed oil


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes, I forgot you wrote your doctoral thesis on van gogh's use of seed oil



Yeah, that was a bit of a mistake seeing how it was his early adoption of synthetic pigments that was far more relevant in terms of his art.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> Yeah, that was a bit of a mistake seeing how it was his early adoption of synthetic pigments that was far more relevant in terms of his art.


Everyone's wise after the event


----------



## bellaozzydog (Oct 17, 2022)

There is a baffling number of people on Twitter who should at least tip their hat to direct action who are sniping about this

Bonnie Greer, GRT Twitterati etc


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> There is a baffling number of people on Twitter who should at least tip their hat to direct action who are sniping about this
> 
> Bonnie Greer, GRT Twitterati etc



Paging redsquirrel...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 17, 2022)




----------



## LDC (Oct 17, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> There is a baffling number of people on Twitter who should at least tip their hat to direct action who are sniping about this
> 
> Bonnie Greer, GRT Twitterati etc



Because it's not direct action. And what it is was could be argued to be not a good target for a variety of reasons. And that the strategy that this type of action comes from is fundamentally flawed.

So there's some pretty good reasons to think it was politically not a great thing to do, even if you support action on climate change, direct action, etc. wholeheartedly.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


>




If I was them I'd be more concerned about the Loch Ness monster's muscling in on the action!


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> I mean, when it comes to "protesting against fossil fuel stuff", you have said on this very thread that:
> 
> So I'll take your opinions on the value of "protesting against fossil fuel stuff" with a grain of salt there.



Funnily enough I can have an opinion whether their tactic of targeting museums is likely to be found appropriate by the majority of people, and also an opinion on whether the targeting of Schlumberger et al will actually help them achieve their stated aim. Two very different things.



hitmouse said:


> But more importantly, I'm interested in why it is that people go from "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be a front for Big Oil" rather than "they are chucking soup over artworks, a tactic I disagree with, so therefore they must be people who have views I disagree with on what the best ways to acheive our shared goals are?" This is the part that actually interests me, why is it that people find it easier to believe half-baked conspiracy theories than to accept that there are people who genuinely prefer different tactics and strategies?



Who knows? Maybe people either aren’t convinced by their goals or don’t understand them? Maybe their tactics are so shite that people can’t understand how people who share their views could reasonably decide to adopt them?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

I'm still not sure why they haven't opened two lanes.  They said they'll be up there for 24 hours so they can close it for a bit for that.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

‘Mr Trowland said: "Our government has enacted suicidal laws to accelerate oil production - killing human life and destroying our environment. I can't challenge this madness in my desk job, designing bridges, so I'm taking direct action."’

Direct action against his day job?


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Who knows? Maybe people either aren’t convinced by their goals or don’t understand them? Maybe their tactics are so shite that people can’t understand how people who share their views could reasonably decide to adopt them?


Lots of people make tactical decisions that I think are indefensibly shit all the time. I'm not even particularly sold on the merits of this specific action, I think it's a very effective way of achieving one specific goal (media attention) but I'm not sure that pursuing that goal is the most useful thing to be doing. But that's not the point, the point I'm interested in is that there are people who seem to be incapable of imagining a sincere, meaningful disagreement, so anyone using tactics they think are shit must be part of a conspiracy. You seem to think that's a reasonable and defensible position, would you like to expand some more on it?


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 17, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Lots of people make tactical decisions that I think are indefensibly shit all the time. I'm not even particularly sold on the merits of this specific action, I think it's a very effective way of achieving one specific goal (media attention) but I'm not sure that pursuing that goal is the most useful thing to be doing. But that's not the point, the point I'm interested in is that there are people who seem to be incapable of imagining a sincere, meaningful disagreement, so anyone using tactics they think are shit must be part of a conspiracy. You seem to think that's a reasonable and defensible position, would you like to expand some more on it?



Because their tactics are so bizarre they invite conspiracy theory, because the only other reasonable explanation is that they’re idiots. There can’t be sincere meaningful disagreement if your colleagues, instead of joining you on a strike for more pay, go around shitting in primary school classrooms to get media attention.

Prior to the TikTok whatevers, people on this very thread were suggesting that only those working for oil interests could conceive of such ridiculous protest tactics.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> There can’t be sincere meaningful disagreement if your colleagues, instead of joining you on a strike for more pay, go around shitting in primary school classrooms to get media attention.



This post hasn’t really cleared things up as well as I was initially expecting.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 17, 2022)

He's got a point though. Splashing soup on a famous painting (but not really, so you can't be mad nyer nyer) is a pretty fucking bizarre way of "bringing attention" to a subject that's constantly in the news, especially nowadays when you don't need a meteorology degree to see how fucked-up the climate is becoming.

My working assumption is the people who did this thing are sincere idiots. I wouldn't rule out conspiracy, but it wasn't my go-to explanation.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 17, 2022)

To me they looked like kids. And in terms of getting attention it worked. Plus it's kind of a memorable thing. And didn't damage the painting anyway. Fair enough really, I think.


----------



## Dystopiary (Oct 17, 2022)

I think there's been about a page and half now without any posts about animal rights protestors throwing endangered almond milk at innocent supermarket floors.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2022)

Humberto said:


> To me they looked like kids.



Not to diss them in any way because of it, but fucking hell, they looked like their skull fissures hadn’t closed and they were yet to form kneecaps.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 18, 2022)

Humberto said:


> To me they looked like kids. And in terms of getting attention it worked. Plus it's kind of a memorable thing. And didn't damage the painting anyway. Fair enough really, I think.



If I drop my pants and shit in a public street, that would get attention too. Still wouldn't do a damn thing about climate change, even if I did claim that was why I was doing it.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 18, 2022)

I seem to have inadvertently read the daily mail comments section.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 18, 2022)

alex_ said:


> I seem to have inadvertently read the daily mail comments section.


If you think the criticism here is akin to the Daily Mail comments section, then you clearly operate in some kind of hermetically sealed media bubble. Or you haven't seen Daily Mail comments in ages. I don't see anyone here calling for the cops to come in and smash their heads, for example. That kind of comment is pretty standard at right wing sites.

Just because someone is "doing something" about a genuinely important issue, doesn't mean that their actions are beyond reproach.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2022)

Humberto said:


> To me they looked like kids. And in terms of getting attention it worked. Plus it's kind of a memorable thing. And didn't damage the painting anyway. Fair enough really, I think.


but would you eat your dinner off that painting?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2022)

NoXion said:


> If I drop my pants and shit in a public street, that would get attention too. Still wouldn't do a damn thing about climate change, even if I did claim that was why I was doing it.



It's a small act, but hopefully will spur others on, particularly the young. And shows that with a bit of gumption and inventiveness they can keep climate protest in the news.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Oct 18, 2022)

NoXion said:


> If I drop my pants and shit in a public street, that would get attention too. Still wouldn't do a damn thing about climate change, even if I did claim that was why I was doing it.


It might give you a platform to explain why you did it, no?


----------



## Gullyteen (Oct 18, 2022)

I think fair play tbh. Aston Martin showroom was a better target but the soup made the news (and did make sense, in a convoluted way - big oil funds the gallery) where their actions against oil infrastructure haven't so I can kind of see why they'd go for a something wacky to get their name about. I wouldn't have gone back and seen the actions at oil depots etc if they hadn't got themselves in the papers for doing something daft


----------



## 8ball (Oct 18, 2022)

I’m not sure why Aston Martin was a good target either.


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2022)

Peter Schmeichal wasn't a striker, but when it was into "Fergie Time" you chucked him up front for corners.

I think we're kinda into Fergie Time as far as climate change goes.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 18, 2022)

chilango said:


> Peter Schmeichal wasn't a striker, but when it was into "Fergie Time" you chucked him up front for corners.
> 
> I think we're kinda into Fergie Time as far as climate change goes.



If someone genuinely believes it’s Fergie Time wtf are they doing with tomato soup? Surely they should be working through their list of assassinations or something, if everyone is going to be extinct in short order.


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If someone genuinely believes it’s Fergie Time wtf are they doing with tomato soup? Surely they should be working through their list of assassinations or something, if everyone is going to be extinct in short order.


I don't disagree, but not everyone has assassination of highly protected figures in their arsenal of "things I can actually do next week". Sadly.


----------



## LDC (Oct 18, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> It might give you a platform to explain why you did it, no?



It might. But it might also understandably distract from why you did it as people discuss why you felt the need to drop your pants and have a shit as that seems rather than bonkers why to draw attention to something like climate change.

The thing is there's no shortage of discussion about climate change, that's not the problem at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> I’m not sure why Aston Martin was a good target either.


Never mind


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 18, 2022)

chilango said:


> I don't disagree, but not everyone has assassination of highly protected figures in their arsenal of "things I can actually do next week". Sadly.



Surely at least some people would if they genuinely believed we were two years away from an irreversible path to total extinction. I guess no one actually believes that, so tomato soup it is.


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Surely at least some people would if they genuinely believed we were two years away from an irreversible path to total extinction. I guess no one actually believes that, so tomato soup it is.


Feeling it's justified and actually being able to do it are two different things.

(for the record I don't believe we're "two years away from an irreversible path to total extinction". Nope, I believe we're already several years into a process of catastrophic climate change that will kill 100s of millions and lead to widespread social collapse. Not extinction though. Nor do I think we've still got two years. You play till the whistle though)


----------



## 8ball (Oct 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Never mind



Guess they pick up more oil drilling contracts than you do with the thinking contracts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> Guess they pick up more oil drilling contracts than you do with the thinking contracts.


Yeh with three jobs already I don't go looking for more contracts, not enough hours in the day


----------



## 8ball (Oct 18, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh with three jobs already I don't go looking for more contracts, not enough hours in the day



Oh yeah, Liz Truss’s people called.

Something something refund…


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2022)

I have criticisms of JSO or ER, with respect to their ideology, strategy and tactics.

But hey considering some of crap on this, and the ER, thread - I'm inclined to say good on them.

EDIT: and the bridge action was well done


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> Oh yeah, Liz Truss’s people called.
> 
> Something something refund…


Somehow I'm not surprised they had your number


----------



## AverageJoe (Oct 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Surely at least some people would if they genuinely believed we were two years away from an irreversible path to total extinction. I guess no one actually believes that, so tomato soup it is.


I agree with this.

But at the  same time I can't actually look forward to what's happening in two years, ten years, twenty years whatever.

I've got to feed my kids today. And tomorrow. And the day after. And get them to school. And make them better versions of me. Pay my gas and leccy bill. Keep a roof over our heads and their bellies full. And not let them succumb to all the insidious side effects of being teenagers with access to the the Internet.



So as much as I want to agree with them, too much actual life is happening in between.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 18, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Surely at least some people would if they genuinely believed we were two years away from an irreversible path to total extinction. I guess no one actually believes that, so tomato soup it is.



Sorry, what’s happening in two years?  Wasn’t it ten years last year?


----------



## bellaozzydog (Oct 18, 2022)

Keep breaking stuff


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2022)

Interesting interview with the Van Gogh Soup protestors in Frieze - they remain impressively on-message throughout. 









						An Interview With Just Stop Oil
					

Activists Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland – who recently threw a can of tomato soup at a Vincent Van Gogh painting in the National Gallery, London – speak about their fight for the future




					www.frieze.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 19, 2022)

Mike Parry on BBC R2, shouty, shouty man. "Why an Aston Martin garage and not a food bank?" - ehrm...


----------



## 8ball (Oct 19, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Mike Parry on BBC R2, shouty, shouty man. "Why an Aston Martin garage and not a food bank?" - ehrm...



Aston Martin was a genius target to choose because... cars... and ... something something James Bond.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 19, 2022)

8ball said:


> Aston Martin was a genius target to choose because... cars... and ... something something James Bond.



Rich people's cars. It's the poor bearing the brunt of climate change consequences, they say.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 19, 2022)

Humberto said:


> Rich people's cars. It's the poor bearing the brunt of climate change consequences, they say.



The poor tend to bear the brunt of most things, true.  However Aston Martin (small volume, independently owned, making big investments in green tech <for whatever that's worth>) seems an odd choice when e.g. Lamborghini is owned by a parent company notorious for fudging emissions data on cars right across the range.


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Throwing soup at a Van Gogh does seem uniquely pathetic.
> 
> Somoneo somewhere pointed out that Van Gogh was someone who was subject to oppression in his own life. So well done. That may have been said here, I don't know, I'm very tired




“It is not the language of painters but the language of nature which one should listen to, the feeling for the things themselves, for reality is more important than the feeling for pictures.”
— Vincent Van Gogh


----------



## Karl Masks (Oct 19, 2022)

Why not chuck soup at a BP executive? Tin or not!


----------



## hitmouse (Oct 19, 2022)

killer b said:


> Interesting interview with the Van Gogh Soup protestors in Frieze - they remain impressively on-message throughout.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Somewhat less impressed by the interviewer, though:


> *AD: Can you tell me a little bit about the structure of Stop the Oil?*


----------



## DaphneM (Oct 20, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Throwing soup at a Van Gogh does seem uniquely pathetic.
> 
> Somoneo somewhere pointed out that Van Gogh was someone who was subject to oppression in his own life. So well done. That may have been said here, I don't know, I'm very tired


this lot do seem a bit thick


----------



## Karl Masks (Oct 20, 2022)

DaphneM said:


> this lot do seem a bit thick


what about the soup though? Minestrone? Cream of chucking?


----------



## NoXion (Oct 22, 2022)

> So far, we’ve seen 33 million people in Pakistan displaced by apocalyptic floods, 36 million have had their lives absolutely ruined by the famines in East Africa. Yet, all it took was two young people to throw soup at a painting to get people talking more than they have done in such a long time about the climate crisis.



They're not talking about the climate crisis, though. They're talking about how stupid it is to target an unrelated artwork. Do these idiots actually pay attention to the _content_ of the attention that they generate, or are they just limiting themselves to listening to those who pat them on the back for making a scene?

Also, the famines and the floods _have_ been in the news. The stupid soup stunt isn't getting to anyone who hasn't already heard.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2022)

8ball said:


> Guess they pick up more oil drilling contracts than you do with the thinking contracts.


It's about what stimulates oil production. Luxury cars do. Add to that, he fact that even with much-increased internal combustion engine efficiency, cars with 2 litre plus engines are still the norm in many urban centres (Range Rover Evoques are almost fucking ubiquitous round here).
Then you've got cunts like Bahnhof Strasse drive their 3 litre Audis, the younger, weedier siblings of Aston Martin. It's consumption culture, & the more often that's pointed out, the better.
Many German cities in the various _lande_ have had great success giving tax breaks, scrappage & other schemes to people to get rid of big cars, & adopt a "Town Car" approach. Vehicles with smaller, more efficient engines are subsidised. Traffic pollution has fairly consistently fallen, even in congested city centres. Here (Brixton), we're still inhaling some of the worst traffic pollution in London.
Just Stop Oil's activism reminds me of some of Class War's stunts. It's about drawing attention to the absurdities of capitalism (remember the Cereal Killer Cafe redecoration?). It's more effective than marching from A to B.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Why not chuck soup at a BP executive? Tin or not!


A can of Castrol GTX (showing my age there!) would be more appropriate (& cause more severe wounding), surely?


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's about drawing attention to the absurdities of capitalism



Yeah fucking historical paintings in a free-to-enter gallery! That would never be allowed under full communism, they'd be permanently submerged in soup, safely out of sight.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Yeah fucking historical paintings in a free-to-enter gallery! That would never be allowed under full communism, they'd be permanently submerged in soup, safely out of sight.


A painting worth around £30 million. I think most people can appreciate the absurdity of THAT!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> A can of Castrol GTX (showing my age there!) would be more appropriate (& cause more severe wounding), surely?


or a simple can of coke


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> or a simple can of coke


GTX came in litre steel cans, coke comes in 330ml aluminium cans. I like to think of the damage a 1l steel can full of oil can do. Coke cans would split on impact!


----------



## 8ball (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's about what stimulates oil production. Luxury cars do.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 24, 2022)

8ball said:


>


So you think that hundreds of thousands of new luxury vehicles annually, in Europe alone, don't stimulate oil production?
We - the west - have an ever-increasing number of cars on the road, many of them with unnecessarily large engines in them (see the Chelsea Tractor/school run threads of yore). It may not stimulate oil production as much as power generation does, but it's a factor, & one that shouldn't be ignored.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> So you think that hundreds of thousands of new luxury vehicles annually, in Europe alone, don't stimulate oil production?
> We - the west - have an ever-increasing number of cars on the road, many of them with unnecessarily large engines in them (see the Chelsea Tractor/school run threads of yore). It may not stimulate oil production as much as power generation does, but it's a factor, & one that shouldn't be ignored.



You could pick just about anything and say it “stimulates oil production”.

Including, apparently, old paintings.

Take a look at the proportion of fossil fuels used by cars out of the total usage.  Cars are a distraction in terms of oil and energy use.

Governments know this, and like to use the fact to individualise the issue.


----------



## Aladdin (Oct 24, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> what about the soup though? Minestrone? Cream of chucking?



It was mashed potato today.
Very runny mashed potato.
A sin against mashed potatoes everywhere.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's about what stimulates oil production. Luxury cars do. Add to that, he fact that even with much-increased internal combustion engine efficiency, cars with 2 litre plus engines are still the norm in many urban centres (Range Rover Evoques are almost fucking ubiquitous round here).
> Then you've got cunts like Bahnhof Strasse drive their 3 litre Audis, the younger, weedier siblings of Aston Martin. It's consumption culture, & the more often that's pointed out, the better.
> Many German cities in the various _lande_ have had great success giving tax breaks, scrappage & other schemes to people to get rid of big cars, & adopt a "Town Car" approach. Vehicles with smaller, more efficient engines are subsidised. Traffic pollution has fairly consistently fallen, even in congested city centres. Here (Brixton), we're still inhaling some of the worst traffic pollution in London.
> Just Stop Oil's activism reminds me of some of Class War's stunts. It's about drawing attention to the absurdities of capitalism (remember the Cereal Killer Cafe redecoration?). It's more effective than marching from A to B.




I no longer have a three litre Audi, bought a 1.4ltr petrol for BB1 to become indoctrinated in to the car driving world. Plus most of my miles are by bike. But am still a cunt, almost as big a one as you.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> A painting worth around £30 million. I think most people can appreciate the absurdity of THAT!



Yet throwing soup or mashed potato at them does literally nothing to challenge that. Indeed the stunt just wouldn't work at all if it was just some random painting that wasn't valued in the millions.



ViolentPanda said:


> Just Stop Oil's activism reminds me of some of Class War's stunts. It's about drawing attention to the absurdities of capitalism (remember the Cereal Killer Cafe redecoration?). It's more effective than marching from A to B.



How is this effectiveness determined? Following these events I've seen a lot of arguments along the lines of "well you're talking about it, so it must be working!". Yeah no, just because something draws attention doesn't mean that the attention is going to amount to anything useful for the cause concerned. A lot of the people I've seen talking about these actions (outside of Urban) are supremely baffled by the choice of art galleries as targets.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 24, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I no longer have a three litre Audi, bought a 1.4ltr petrol for BB1 to become indoctrinated in to the car driving world. Plus most of my miles are by bike. But am still a cunt, almost as big a one as you.


Don't worry I still have mine but it's only's a 2ltr so my cuntiness score is probably lower than yours.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 24, 2022)

ViolentPanda said:


> So you think that hundreds of thousands of new luxury vehicles annually, in Europe alone, don't stimulate oil production?
> We - the west - have an ever-increasing number of cars on the road, many of them with unnecessarily large engines in them (see the Chelsea Tractor/school run threads of yore). It may not stimulate oil production as much as power generation does, but it's a factor, & one that shouldn't be ignored.



… just as an addendum to previous reply- I agree the Chelsea Tractors on the school run are ridiculous and wasteful and polluting.

Also, good to see you back posting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2022)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I no longer have a three litre Audi, bought a 1.4ltr petrol for BB1 to become indoctrinated in to the car driving world. Plus most of my miles are by bike. But am still a cunt, almost as big a one as you.


You'll never be as big a cunt as me. You'll always be an also-ran!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2022)

Aladdin said:


> It was mashed potato today.
> Very runny mashed potato.
> A sin against mashed potatoes everywhere.


Was probably that instant wallpaper paste-a-like shite.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2022)

MickiQ said:


> Don't worry I still have mine but it's only's a 2ltr so my cuntiness score is probably lower than yours.


Much lower. 
For a start, you don't post boasts about yours, so...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 25, 2022)

8ball said:


> … just as an addendum to previous reply- I agree the Chelsea Tractors on the school run are ridiculous and wasteful and polluting.
> 
> Also, good to see you back posting.


I had a lot of business stuff to deal with - I chair a CIC - plus the health stuff was physically & mentally exhausting me, especially the 2nd round of (supposedly relatively mild) chemo. Then I went & had a fall, fucked my knee up somewhat, & spent several weeks on oxycodone, which was very nice, but not conducive to lucid thought!
All in all, good to be back - except for that cunt Spymaster , obviously!


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 25, 2022)

Nice to see you back too, fella.


----------



## Dystopiary (Oct 26, 2022)

Lil Nas on twitter


----------



## edcraw (Oct 28, 2022)

This poor working class fella has been forced to clean 55 Tuffton St by the middle class tofu eating wokerati. Prob just wanted to sit with a beer and watch the footy or whatever these working folk do.


----------



## Cerv (Oct 28, 2022)

hope that the cleaner gratuitously overcharged them. so the JSO action hits the wankers in their pockets.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 29, 2022)

Cerv said:


> hope that the cleaner gratuitously overcharged them. so the JSO action hits the wankers in their pockets.



Maybe he’s a JSO plant.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 30, 2022)

If they wanted to raise awareness and create a debate surely they wouldn't have turned off the comments on all their YouTube videos of their protests


----------



## edcraw (Oct 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If they wanted to raise awareness and create a debate surely they wouldn't have turned off the comments on all their YouTube videos of their protests


YouTube comments section solving world problems since 2005 🤪


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 30, 2022)

edcraw said:


> This poor working class fella has been forced to clean 55 Tuffton St by the middle class tofu eating wokerati. Prob just wanted to sit with a beer and watch the footy or whatever these working folk do.




I assume he's been paid so surely this is creating jobs and thus a positive? Especially when those in tufton street have made so many lose work


----------



## NoXion (Oct 30, 2022)

It's a clean up job in the middle of London. I'd be surprised if it wasn't relatively well paid.


----------



## Karl Masks (Oct 30, 2022)

They'd be doing that job anyway.

Only difference, Mr Tufton wouldn't be pretending to care if it werent his front door and if it weren't a bunch of oiks throwing climate minestrone everywhere.

Who knew soup was so hard to clean?


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 30, 2022)

I was thinking of the Greenham Common protesters today, who no doubt would have been more successful if they'd spent most of their time vomiting on the stages of concert halls in Scotland. I bet the people would really have noticed that sort of stunt, and put lots more pressure on Thatcher.


----------



## edcraw (Oct 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I was thinking of the Greenham Common protesters today, who no doubt would have been more successful if they'd spent most of their time vomiting on the stages of concert halls in Scotland. I bet the people would really have noticed that sort of stunt, and put lots more pressure on Thatcher.


Because no one moaned about their tactics and we now live in a world free of nuclear weapons…







						Protest by CND stretches 14 miles |  Special reports | guardian.co.uk
					






					www.theguardian.com


----------



## edcraw (Oct 31, 2022)

These are presumably the wrong targets, actions or wrong sort of people carrying them out as well.


----------



## platinumsage (Oct 31, 2022)

edcraw said:


> These are presumably the wrong targets, actions or wrong sort of people carrying them out as well.



idk but this one was more entertaining:


----------



## 8ball (Oct 31, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> idk but this one was more entertaining:




Proper Dad fight there.

I love the “I don’t want to do this” gambit.  I’m going to try it out.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 2, 2022)

They tried to climb the gate into Downing Street, but they didn't seem very determined:


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 2, 2022)

Here's a reminder of when direct action protesters against oil infrastructure actually did something:






						“The Brent Spar Fight” Greenpeace: 1995 | The Pop History Dig
					

Magazine-styled website about contemporary culture, politics, and business history, crafted to engage readers on topics ranging from civil rights history to the power of the entertainment industry, environmental politics, sports history, music, film, and the media.




					pophistorydig.com


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

Found platinumsage ‘s Insta!


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 2, 2022)

I'm genuinely not sure where I stand on all this. I want there to be direct action. It's just so alienatingly middle-class isn't it, from conception to execution.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> I'm genuinely not sure where I stand on all this. I want there to be direct action. It's just so alienatingly middle-class isn't it, from conception to execution.


Not sure that’s a reason not to support them or the cause - maybe actually a reason to get involved? - also it’s a phenomenon that is sadly very not unique to JSO.









						Why middle class activism surprises economists
					

A middle class in modern societies often causes political ferment and spearheads mass movements against the status quo. The political turmoils that swept Brazil, Bulgaria and Turkey in 2013 provide…




					blogs.lse.ac.uk


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

If a group conducts actions that do nothing for or are perhaps even counter-productive to their stated cause, _and_ they refuse to engage with any criticism no matter how sincere, then I'd say that's a good enough reason not to support them.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Not sure that’s a reason not to support them or the cause - maybe actually a reason to get involved? - also it’s a phenomenon that is sadly very not unique to JSO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think being alienated by them is a reason to get involved with them.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

NoXion said:


> If a group conducts actions that do nothing for or are perhaps even counter-productive to their stated cause, _and_ they refuse to engage with any criticism no matter how sincere, then I'd say that's a good enough reason not to support them.





Dystopiary said:


> I don't think being alienated by them is a reason to get involved with them.


I’m not sure either of these are happening.

This is not a unique phenomenon but seems a useful stick to beat JSO & XR with. You either think we should do something about the climate crisis or you don’t.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> This is not a unique phenomenon but seems a useful stick to beat JSO & XR with. You either think we should do something about the climate crisis or you don’t.



They've made a rod for their own backs with some of the things they chosen to do.

Doing something merely for the sake of doing something is vapid and facile. OK, so they've got some attention. Mission accomplished, even though climate change is one of those things that's always in the news anyway. Let's leave aside the question of whether the attention they've garnered is positive or negative overall. Now what?


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

NoXion said:


> They've made a rod for their own backs with some of the things they chosen to do.
> 
> Doing something merely for the sake of doing something is vapid and facile. OK, so they've got some attention. Mission accomplished, even though climate change is one of those things that's always in the news anyway. Let's leave aside the question of whether the attention they've garnered is positive or negative overall. Now what?


I don’t no what actions you mean - blocking roads, spraying buildings or attacking art works are hardly just targeting the working class. Am I missing something?


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> I don’t no what actions you mean - blocking roads, spraying buildings or attacking art works are hardly just targeting the working class. Am I missing something?



It's not difficult. Attempting to vandalise a widely-regarded work of art is a great way of sabotaging whatever message comes after it.

On the other hand, chucking paint over a posh car showroom at least has some kind of connection with the intended message.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

NoXion said:


> It's not difficult. Attempting to vandalise a widely-regarded work of art is a great way of sabotaging whatever message comes after it.



Really? We’re back to this. If a painting not being damaged is enough to put you off a cause I don’t think you were ever that convinced.

It does seem that protests have to fit some very fine undefined rules to ensure they don’t alienate some people!


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Really? We’re back to this. If a painting not being damaged is enough to put you off a cause I don’t think you were ever that convinced.



The fact that damage did not occur doesn't change the fact an attempt was made. These activists drew attention, sure. But I would argue not to an issue that's already been the talk of the last decade, if not longer. But to themselves. So what's the fucking point?

If climate change is so important, then why waste time and effort and the reputation of your organisation on pointless actions that garner meaningless if not negative attention?



edcraw said:


> It does seem that protests have to fit some very fine undefined rules to ensure they don’t alienate some people!



"Make sure your target is relevant" doesn't seem to be an unreasonable expectation to me.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

NoXion said:


> "Make sure your target is relevant" doesn't seem to be an unreasonable expectation to me.


So blocking roads is fine then for JSO but the suffragettes breaking windows was wrong.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> This is not a unique phenomenon but seems a useful stick to beat JSO & XR with. You either think we should do something about the climate crisis or you don’t.



They're alienating working class people. That's not a useful stick to beat them with, it's a reason not to get involved with them. Risks/benefits are not going to be the same for some people as others. ("The planet's in crisis" - which it obviously is - doesn't negate that fact.)

Are they going to help pay poorer people's fines? Do they recognise that the police treat certain members of society differently? People aren't necessarily going to take risks to get on board with something that's probably not very productive (or even counterproductive) and certainly not with people who don't seem to see class an actual material phenomenon. That's not simply having a go at them cos they're posh; it's a realistic consideration. 


(Edited for typos.)


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> So blocking roads is fine then for JSO but the suffragettes breaking windows was wrong.



Nailbombing tourists in Westminster Abbey was wrong, as was much of their bombing and arson campaign. Not sure a few broken windows were that important, but the value of the entire suffragette direct action campaign is debatable, maybe it actually delayed universal suffrage, but that tends to get glossed over because they were on the right side of the argument.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> So blocking roads is fine then for JSO but the suffragettes breaking windows was wrong.



I'm ambivalent about the road blocking, to be honest. Does it help or hinder the cause? I honestly don't know. But considering just how important climate change is, then any organisation campaigning on that issue needs to be utterly ruthless in assessing the impacts of their actions. I am not getting that impression from JSO, it seems they want to get attention any way how.

As for the suffragette thing, most people don't remember them for breaking windows, do they? Certainly I'd not heard of them doing that until now. I'd not heard of them fucking nail bombing Westminster Abbey either. Jesus Christ. Just goes to show that you can be on the right side of history while still committing terrorist atrocities.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

NoXion said:


> I'm ambivalent about the road blocking, to be honest. Does it help or hinder the cause? I honestly don't know. But considering just how important climate change is, then any organisation campaigning on that issue needs to be utterly ruthless in assessing the impacts of their actions. I am not getting that impression from JSO, it seems they want to get attention any way how.
> 
> As for the suffragette thing, most people don't remember them for breaking windows, do they? Certainly I'd not heard of them doing that until now. I'd not heard of them fucking nail bombing Westminster Abbey either. Jesus Christ. Just goes to show that you can be on the right side of history while still committing terrorist atrocities.


I’m not sure ignorance is the virtue you think it is. Pretty sure most with a passing knowledge of the suffragettes know about the window smashing. Are you even aware of the hunger strikes?

The fact terrorists can be on the right side also really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Not much tends to happen just by asking nicely. JSO actions would only be described as terrorism by the most authoritarian people - these people L just happen to be in government and in charge of our right wing press sadly.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 2, 2022)

If every way they protest seems to invite criticism maybe its actually the message that people have a problem with. It’d be great if people were just a bot more honest.


----------



## Cerv (Nov 2, 2022)

Didn’t Morgan storm off his old itv show in a huff? Tantrum throwing toddler indeed.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2022)

edcraw said:


> I’m not sure ignorance is the virtue you think it is. Pretty sure most with a passing knowledge of the suffragettes know about the window smashing. Are you even aware of the hunger strikes?



Where did I claim that ignorance is a virtue? I did no such thing. I am aware of the hunger strikes. I reckon most people think better of such self-sacrificing actions than they do of attempts to murder random civilians, which is why that little bit of history doesn't get talked about as much.



edcraw said:


> The fact terrorists can be on the right side also really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Not much tends to happen just by asking nicely. JSO actions would only be described as terrorism by the most authoritarian people - these people L just happen to be in government and in charge of our right wing press sadly.



As if there isn't a whole spectrum, nay a landscape, of potential activity outside of "just asking nicely". Would you still be thinking that JSO is right-on if they _did_ start a terror campaign? After all, it would _certainly_ bring attention, wouldn't it? Climate change will negatively impact the lives of _billions_. What's wrong with a little terror to save so many human lives? No publicity is bad publicity! History will absolve the martyrs.



edcraw said:


> If every way they protest seems to invite criticism maybe its actually the message that people have a problem with. It’d be great if people were just a bot more honest.




Cherrypicking absolute twats like Piers fucking Morgan is a great way of ignoring nuance, I agree.


----------



## LDC (Nov 2, 2022)

I don't think the 'they're all middle class' nor the 'they're alienating/causing problems for the working class' are politically useful criticisms tbh. My criticisms are only very slightly about the perception of what they do (although that is heavily mediated through the press we see, and actual public opinion might be very different) but much more about the overall strategy for change that JSO has (doesn't have?) and how these events fit into that. The gluing heads and soup throwing etc. look like increasingly weird symbolic stunts done by a very small number of people and that have no direct impact on the government, nor do they reduce the profit of fossil fuel companies. The argument it's about 'raising/keeping the issues in the press' is bollocks as far as I can see, it's in the press the whole time, solutions are even there for all to see, it's the lack of political will to do anything that's the block, how does this force that along? I have _some _sympathy with the argument that this type of stuff makes it easy to portray climate action as a bit loony and might even be making solutions less likely not more likely.

I do think there's a weird mis-match between what they say and what they do as well. A friend wrote something years ago titled, "What if we acted like we _really _meant it?" and this lot fit right into it that 'serious talk/comedy action' box. All this talk of global extinction and mass die-off, and all they can do is some lame paint throwing and chucking soup at art? Not sure that makes any sense in the context of climate change and what might happen. In that vein I think sooner or later we'll see some climate change violent direct action, although maybe not in Europe, but in plenty of parts of the world it might happen sooner rather than later...?


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 2, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Here's a reminder of when direct action protesters against oil infrastructure actually did something:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree, that sounds great. Just like fucking up that fossil fuel research centre, or the oil terminal blockades in April. But you've said on this thread that you don't agree with targeting fossil fuel infrastructure, so is the point here just "here's some other actions which I also don't agree with"?


edcraw said:


> I’m not sure either of these are happening.
> 
> This is not a unique phenomenon but seems a useful stick to beat JSO & XR with. You either think we should do something about the climate crisis or you don’t.


Tbf, I don't think that's a useful binary - "we should do something about the climate crisis" covers everything from platinum's "we should get the oil industry to sort climate change out" to "we should take material direct action against fossil fuel infrastructure now and JSO seem fairly irrelevant to that" and all points in between.


edcraw said:


> If every way they protest seems to invite criticism maybe its actually the message that people have a problem with. It’d be great if people were just a bot more honest.



Yes, would be interested in platinum's take on that one?


LDC said:


> I do think there's a weird mis-match between what they say and what they do as well. A friend wrote something years ago titled, "What if we acted like we _really _meant it?" and this lot fit right into it that 'serious talk/comedy action' box. All this talk of global extinction and mass die-off, and all they can do is some lame paint throwing and chucking soup at art? Not sure that makes any sense in the context of climate change and what might happen. In that vein I think sooner or later we'll see some climate change violent direct action, although maybe not in Europe, but in plenty of parts of the world it might happen sooner rather than later...?


I reckon we'll see it in Europe too, depends on definitions of violence but non-pacifist resistance seems most likely to happen at sites of extraction and so on, thinking of things like Standing Rock or the Wet'suwet'en pipeline camps in Canada, I'm not a huge expert on Ende Gelande but that seems like a relevant European example? Or the ZAD?


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 2, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> I agree, that sounds great. Just like fucking up that fossil fuel research centre, or the oil terminal blockades in April. But you've said on this thread that you don't agree with targeting fossil fuel infrastructure, so is the point here just "here's some other actions which I also don't agree with"?



You’re quoting me out of context, as I explained here.

I’ve already detailed the obvious protest target that aligns perfectly with their agenda and which they’ve completely ignored.




hitmouse said:


> Tbf, I don't think that's a useful binary - "we should do something about the climate crisis" covers everything from platinum's "we should get the oil industry to sort climate change out"



I definitely didn’t say or imply that. Do you just like making up bollocks?


----------



## cybershot (Nov 4, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Found platinumsage ‘s Insta!



Gonna need some different coloured paint if they head to McLaren.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Presumably this action has the support of Platty Sage etc.



Also just looks good fun!


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 6, 2022)

edcraw said:


> I don’t no what actions you mean - blocking roads, spraying buildings or attacking art works are hardly just targeting the working class. Am I missing something?



Im a bit surprised at your posts here.

On the Brixton forum LTN thread you come across as legalistic. Anyone taking action that is against Council policy is going against democracy. That Lambeth Council are the elected authority and any action opposing them whether going down the legal  route  ( disabled person going to Judicial Review) or other opposition is to be regarded as illegitimate. 

Im not clear on the basis that you see direct action as legitimate. Or going down the legal route as legitimate.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> Im a bit surprised at your posts here.
> 
> On the Brixton forum LTN thread you come across as legalistic. Anyone taking action that is against Council policy is going against democracy. That Lambeth Council are the elected authority and any action opposing them whether going down the legal  route  ( disabled person going to Judicial Review) or other opposition is to be regarded as illegitimate.
> 
> Im not clear on the basis that you see direct action as legitimate. Or going down the legal route as legitimate.


The difference is the cause. Slight difference between vandalising road signs and pouring motor oil on plants because you have to drive a slightly more inconvenient way and protesting about the destruction of the planet. Seems pretty obvious no?

As for the court case - of course people can waste £60k losing cases that wouldn’t even have bought the result they want (the end of LTNs) and I’m free to call it out as stupid & pointless.


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 6, 2022)

edcraw said:


> The difference is the cause. Slight difference between vandalising road signs and pouring motor oil on plants because you have to drive a slightly more inconvenient way and protesting about the destruction of the planet. Seems pretty obvious no?



No that is not how it was discussed on the Brixton Forum as you should know. 

So what you are saying is that this is somehow different.

On the Brixton Forum your tone was somewhat different. 

You were saying this form of direct action was illegitimate. 

So what Im getting at is what forms of "direct action" you think are compatible with a democratic society and what aren't?

As on Brixton Forum there were calls for the wrong kind of direct action to be met with the full force of the law.

On the legal route I take it your know saying the disabled person was legitimate in there legal case"


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> No that is not how it was discussed on the Brixton Forum as you should know.
> 
> So what you are saying is that this is somehow different.
> 
> ...


It’s really not comparable. I said at the time it would be similar if they waited around after the criminal action to be arrested but they weren’t - they were doing it at night mostly to disable to cameras so that they could drive through.

Unsurprisingly I don’t support direct action for things I disagree with. That shouldn’t be a surprise and it’s probably the true reason most of the time for people on here not supporting JSOs actions.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> On the legal route I take it your know saying the disabled person was legitimate in there legal case"


Well it wasn’t legitimate as they lost but they were free to bring it. But as we know most of their supporters seemed to misunderstand what the case was about and what the result might be and the truly vile OneLambeth lot were happy to lead them on.


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 6, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Well it wasn’t legitimate as they lost but they were free to bring it. But as we know most of their supporters seems to misunderstand what the case was about and what the result might be and the truly vile OneLambeth lot were happy to lead them on.



Who is the "we"?

What your saying is the "supporters" had false consciousness. That they were duped and didn't understand. This is so patronising.

They were "led" on. So they were sheep who didnt understand unlike people of higher consciousness like you.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> Who is the "we"?
> 
> What your saying is the "supporters" had false consciousness. That they were duped and didn't understand. This is so patronising.
> 
> They were "led" on. So they were sheep who didnt understand unlike people of higher consciousness like you.


The court case would never have stopped LTNs and that’s why most were donating. OneLambeth seems happy for people to think that.


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 6, 2022)

edcraw said:


> The court case would never have stopped LTNs and that’s why most were donating. OneLambeth seems happy for people to think that.



A working class disabled person takes Lambeth Council to court and this is how you see this.

Which caused them a lot of stress. I dont think you understand. 

Yet you come on this thread all direct action etc

What can I say


----------



## edcraw (Nov 6, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> A working class disabled person takes Lambeth Council to court and this is how you see this.
> 
> Which caused them a lot of stress. I dont think you understand.
> 
> ...


What have I said that’s incorrect?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 7, 2022)

Quite a ballsy move this morning, I thought.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 7, 2022)

Far less effective than GIVE PEAS A CHANCE


----------



## 8ball (Nov 7, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Far less effective than GIVE PEAS A CHANCE



They closed the motorway for that?


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 7, 2022)

8ball said:


> They closed the motorway for that?



I thought JSO's aim was to get their message out, and closing the motorway was merely a method of doing that.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 7, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I thought JSO's aim was to get their message out, and closing the motorway was merely a method of doing that.



Oh?  I thought it was an ongoing vendetta against Little Chef.


----------



## Cerv (Nov 7, 2022)

Little Chef still exists?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 7, 2022)

Cerv said:


> Little Chef still exists?



Not for long now, I reckon.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 7, 2022)

Especially if the Animal Rebellion folks pay them a visit and start throwing sausages around.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 8, 2022)

Arresting the press covering the action:


----------



## edcraw (Nov 8, 2022)

If Just Stop Oil are apparently alienating the public presumably this twat is getting them supporters.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 8, 2022)

Police closed my busy nearest motorway the other day. I agree with Keir Starmer that the police responsible should get longer sentences.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 8, 2022)

edcraw said:


> If Just Stop Oil are apparently alienating the public presumably this twat is getting them supporters.



An absolutely turd of a  person, encouraging thousands of people to publicly rip the piss out of someone at least half his age. 
Apparently he's in the concrete business, so no wonder he wants to belittle environmental campaigners.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 8, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Arresting the press covering the action:





Tom Bowles on twitter


----------



## 8ball (Nov 8, 2022)

Dystopiary said:


> An absolutely turd of a  person, encouraging thousands of people to publicly rip the piss out of someone at least half his age.
> Apparently he's in the concrete business, so no wonder he wants to belittle environmental campaigners.



_Renewable_ concrete.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 8, 2022)

8ball said:


> _Renewable_ concrete.


So he claims.


----------



## lazythursday (Nov 8, 2022)

NoXion said:


> Where did I claim that ignorance is a virtue? I did no such thing. I am aware of the hunger strikes. I reckon most people think better of such self-sacrificing actions than they do of attempts to murder random civilians, which is why that little bit of history doesn't get talked about as much.


There was a guy a few months ago who went on hunger strike with the very reasonable demand that MPs were given a proper scientific briefing on climate change. The government ignored it and he didn't get a lot of press. Caroline Lucas managed to broker a solution with Sir Patrick Vallance offering a briefing to MPs. Less than 10% turned up.

A guy in the US set himself on fire and burned to death to protest climate inaction. Hardly any coverage. 

So the self sacrificing approach hasn't proved successful of late either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2022)

lazythursday said:


> There was a guy a few months ago who went on hunger strike with the very reasonable demand that MPs were given a proper scientific briefing on climate change. The government ignored it and he didn't get a lot of press. Caroline Lucas managed to broker a solution with Sir Patrick Vallance offering a briefing to MPs. Less than 10% turned up.
> 
> A guy in the US set himself on fire and burned to death to protest climate inaction. Hardly any coverage.
> 
> So the self sacrificing approach hasn't proved successful of late either.


Where jso are going wrong is by not focusing politician minds. If they were to assassinate an mp a week until their demands were met the government would have conceded by now but the public would demand jso held firm and acted


----------



## edcraw (Nov 9, 2022)

Gramsci said:


> Im a bit surprised at your posts here.
> 
> On the Brixton forum LTN thread you come across as legalistic. Anyone taking action that is against Council policy is going against democracy. That Lambeth Council are the elected authority and any action opposing them whether going down the legal  route  ( disabled person going to Judicial Review) or other opposition is to be regarded as illegitimate.
> 
> Im not clear on the basis that you see direct action as legitimate. Or going down the legal route as legitimate.


Do please remind me when the person that did this in the middle of the night had the balls to go to prison for their ‘cause’. Remember OneLambeth described this as an ‘art installation’ 🙄


----------



## steveseagull (Nov 9, 2022)

LBC reporter banged up by Herts Police for seven hours under Priti Patel's/Braverman's new laws. Which is quite ironic...


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 9, 2022)

Sort of admire their persistence.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 10, 2022)

I just received an email from them with details of their next non-violence training sessions.

Emailed them back saying to get back to me when they’re running some violence training.


----------



## bcuster (Nov 11, 2022)




----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

Bizarre response to this interviewer



"Why are you using these tactics?"

"We want everyone to come to join us so we don't need to cause disruption on the motorways, we need to be sat outside of parliament with tens and tens of thousands of people demanding an end to new oil and gas"

er... how are these tactics getting more people to put pressure on the government? Surely they are doing the opposite - helping to define an end to new oil and gas as an extremist position?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Bizarre response to this interviewer
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He didn't seem up to that, tbh.


----------



## LDC (Nov 11, 2022)

Indigo Rumblelow? Surely not really?

She does come across as a bit weird tbh.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

There’s a subset of trustafarians who had hippy parents, ime xr-type protesters either fall into that group or else older green party sandal types. 

Rumblelow grew up on a Welsh farm and has enjoyed holidays in Nepal so I think it’s clear which group she falls into.

Not that this matters of course, it should be about the protests not the people. But when they can’t even explain their tactics then it does lead to questioning their motivations.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> There’s a subset of trustafarians who had hippy parents, ime xr-type protesters either fall into that group or else older green party sandal types.
> 
> Rumblelow grew up on a Welsh farm and has enjoyed holidays in Nepal so I think it’s clear which group she falls into.
> 
> Not that this matters of course, it should be about the protests not the people. But when they can’t even explain their tactics then it does lead to questioning their motivations.


Tofu eating wokerati? Alright Suella!


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Tofu eating wokerati? Alright Suella!



Great. Maybe you can explain how their tactic of blocking motorways is meant to get thousands of inconvenienced people lobbying the government to cave in to their demands? It's almost like they live in a bubble and don't know how most of society think and behave.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Great. Maybe you can explain how their tactic of blocking motorways is meant to get thousands of inconvenienced people lobbying the government to cave in to their demands? It's almost like they live in a bubble and don't know how most of society think and behave.


No one is out of tacking climate change by these protests - only climate change denying twats say that. This has made the headlines for weeks now.

Road transport is a huge cause of CO2 emissions - you and others said they should choose targets that make sense so you should be happy their targeting one of the major motorways. Stop arguing in bad faith and just admit that you don’t think anything should be done about the climate crisis.


----------



## LDC (Nov 11, 2022)

edcraw said:


> No one is out of tacking climate change by these protests - only climate change denying twats say that. This has made the headlines for weeks now.
> 
> Road transport is a huge cause of CO2 emissions - you and others said they should choose targets that make sense so you should be happy their targeting one of the major motorways. Stop arguing in bad faith and just admit that you don’t think anything should be done about the climate crisis.
> 
> View attachment 351141



But blocking roads doesn't decrease emissions, if anything it likely increases them - at least in the short term. Not even JSO claim the point of the blockades is to reduce emissions from road transport, it's to cause disruption to pressure the government to withdraw new oil and gas exploration, the motorway is just a weak point where it's easier to cuse disruption with a few people.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

edcraw said:


> No one is out of tacking climate change by these protests - only climate change denying twats say that. This has made the headlines for weeks now.



The tactics have. Haven’t seen anything about new fossil fuel licences, so I don’t see how they’re convincing anyone to protest the government about that.



edcraw said:


> Road transport is a huge cause of CO2 emissions - you and others said they should choose targets that make sense so you should be happy their targeting one of the major motorways. Stop arguing in bad faith and just admit that you don’t think anything should be done about the climate crisis.



Their demand is no new oil and gas licences. She made that clear in the interview. The protests will stop when the government confirms no new licences.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

LDC said:


> But blocking roads doesn't decrease emissions, if anything it likely increases them. Not even JSO claim the point of the blockades is to reduce emissions, it's to cause disruption to pressure the government to withdraw new oil and gas exploration.


I think its a bit ambitious to expect protesters to actually stop CO2 emissions themselves.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The tactics have. Haven’t seen anything about new fossil fuel licences, so I don’t see how they’re convincing anyone to protest the government about that.
> 
> 
> 
> Their demand is no new oil and gas licences. She made that clear in the interview. The protests will stop when the government confirms no new licences.


Mate - you think cars should be allowed to drive on pavements 🤪 I don’t think anything JSO would do would convince you of their argument.









						Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.
					

I've answered these questions a zillion times on other threads, and don't have time to go through it all again just now. I intend to use this thread mainly as a repository for information.  The concise answer is that the aim is a reduction in car dependency. Of course you can't just ban cars and...




					www.urban75.net


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Mate - you think cars should be allowed to drive on pavements 🤪 I don’t think anything JSO would do would convince you of their argument.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So you can’t defend their tactics. And for the record, no I don’t. Your misrepresenting and cross-thread beef is getting quite tedious so you’re going on ignore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The tactics have. Haven’t seen anything about new fossil fuel licences, so I don’t see how they’re convincing anyone to protest the government about that.


There are lots of things you haven't seen


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> There are lots of things you haven't seen



Have you seen the popular media talking about the licensing of new fossil fuel extraction since these protests started?What has been licensed recently or is likely to be soon?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Have you seen the popular media talking about the licensing of new fossil fuel extraction since these protests started?What has been licensed recently or is likely to be soon?











						New UK oil and gas licences defy climate warnings - BBC News
					

More than 100 licences are expected to be granted for new fossil fuel exploration in the North Sea.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Have you seen the popular media talking about the licensing of new fossil fuel extraction since these protests started?What has been licensed recently or is likely to be soon?


I haven't myself looked in the popular press about them, nor do I have much faith in the popular press to report on every subject I'm interested in. But a moment's search turned up this little gem. NSTA launches 33rd Offshore Oil and Gas Licensing Round


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Have you seen the popular media talking about the licensing of new fossil fuel extraction since these protests started?What has been licensed recently or is likely to be soon?


You're talking about the topic; they've succeeded.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

brogdale said:


> You're talking about the topic; they've succeeded.


But their tactics have put him off so much that he’s now applying for off shore drilling licences himself!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2022)

edcraw said:


> But their tactics have put him off so much that he’s now applying for off shore drilling licences himself!!


Couldn't we just put yer man on a platform in the North Sea, or rockall?


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

8ball said:


> New UK oil and gas licences defy climate warnings - BBC News
> 
> 
> More than 100 licences are expected to be granted for new fossil fuel exploration in the North Sea.
> ...



So it was already covered by the media, a few more articles like that and people will surely be turning out in the tens of thousands outside parliament as that woman said in the interview. Or maybe it’ll take a few more road blocks to convince people.



Pickman's model said:


> I haven't myself looked in the popular press about them, nor do I have much faith in the popular press to report on every subject I'm interested in. But a moment's search turned up this little gem. NSTA launches 33rd Offshore Oil and Gas Licensing Round



Yes, I’ve posted about that quango on this thread, I don’t know why JSO haven’t targeted them, it’s a mystery.



brogdale said:


> You're talking about the topic; they've succeeded.



Nope, their stated aim is to get people to put pressure on the government.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Nope, their stated aim is to get people to put pressure on the government.


Awareness raising usually comes before consciousness and activism; they're already winning you over.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

brogdale said:


> Awareness raising usually comes before consciousness and activism; they're already winning you over.



If you say so. Perhaps if they stop me visiting my mum next week I’ll just divert to Parliament Square and harangue Michael Gove or something.

I mean if we just stop extracting stuff we can import more fracked LNG from the USA so that’s cool:









						UK to announce U.S. gas deal after climate change summit -Telegraph
					

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is poised to announce a major natural gas deal with the United States after the COP27 climate change summit, the Telegraph newspaper reported on Monday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 11, 2022)

When is Hallam starting a Just Stop LNG Imports splinter group? Oh wait he’s in HMP Wandsworth.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If you say so. Perhaps if they stop me visiting my mum next week I’ll just divert to Parliament Square and harangue Michael Gove or something.


That's the spirit.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> If you say so. Perhaps if they stop me visiting my mum next week I’ll just divert to Parliament Square and harangue Michael Gove or something.


Why would they block the stairs up from your basement?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> When is Hallam starting a Just Stop LNG Imports splinter group? Oh wait he’s in HMP Wandsworth.


I don't see that as a particular obstacle, why do you think he can't start a group - is he being held in an oubliette without access to lawyers and visitors?


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 11, 2022)

They seem to have a consistent supply of activists to put themselves on the line. I don't think they are trying to engage the likes of talk TV viewers, or even people on Urban. They want to attract and engage people that are willing to do this sort of action and are concerned about the immediate threat of climate change. 

I don't feel the tactics will work, but maybe before I was less cynical I may have been tempted enough to join. Whilst there's plenty of outrage from the usual suspects, under the surface there are probably a lot of young people thinking they'll have some of that. Especially as there isn't much else going on.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 11, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't see that as a particular obstacle, why do you think he can't start a group - is he being held in an oubliette without access to lawyers and visitors?



People have certainly done some quite remarkable things from prison in the past.


----------



## Dystopiary (Nov 11, 2022)

I'm finding the "lock them up" stuff quite alarming. It's not surprising yet I didn't think there'd be so much of it. But I don't think they should block the roads. There are so many things they could do, if you're gonna risk a criminal record (or adding to it) for this, you might as well do something that's less alienating to ordinary people and aimed at the ruling classes instead, or something symbolic.


----------



## Serge Forward (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Great. Maybe you can explain how their tactic of blocking motorways is meant to get thousands of inconvenienced people lobbying the government to cave in to their demands? It's almost like they live in a bubble and don't know how most of society think and behave.


It's intended to cause inconvenience. If something doesn't cause inconvenience them it has zero effect. Imagine a strike that inconveniences no one. What's the point? Now while I might not be a fan of JSO, XR and IB and might not always agree with their tactics or politics (lack of) they at least understand the idea of fucking shit up. I'm surprised you don't understand this.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 12, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> It's intended to cause inconvenience. If something doesn't cause inconvenience them it has zero effect. Imagine a strike that inconveniences no one. What's the point? Now while I might not be a fan of JSO, XR and IB and might not always agree with their tactics or politics (lack of) they at least understand the idea of fucking shit up. I'm surprised you don't understand this.



Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience (lots of strikes don’t affect the public at all). If inconvenience worked then strikers would remain at work on full pay and glue themselves to infrastructure in their time off.

Back when Greenpeace actually did stuff, they did direct action and were often successful, but they took direct action against relevant targets, got widespread media coverage, and widespread public support. They never blocked roads or tried to exert pressure by annoying or inconveniencing people.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience (lots of strikes don’t affect the public at all). If inconvenience worked then strikers would remain at work on full pay and glue themselves to infrastructure in their time off.
> 
> Back when Greenpeace actually did stuff, they did direct action and were often successful, but they took direct action against relevant targets, got widespread media coverage, and widespread public support. They never blocked roads or tried to exert pressure by annoying or inconveniencing people.


Widespread public support….






						Criticism of Greenpeace - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Serge Forward (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience (lots of strikes don’t affect the public at all). If inconvenience worked then strikers would remain at work on full pay and glue themselves to infrastructure in their time off.
> 
> Back when Greenpeace actually did stuff, they did direct action and were often successful, but they took direct action against relevant targets, got widespread media coverage, and widespread public support. They never blocked roads or tried to exert pressure by annoying or inconveniencing people.


Yes, strikes are based on a withdrawal of labour and these are effective when they directly impact on the bosses' business. But guess which strikes are most effective... those which affect infrastructure and inconvenience the public. That's why RMT, ASLEF and transport sections of Unite have the most clout these days and it's why miners and other workers' actions could lead to those inconvenient power cuts in the 70s.

Obviously, strikes are about a lot more than inconvenience, and there's probably lots to criticise JSO* for, but inconveniencing the public isn't it.

* I still have no clue about what chucking soup or beans at works of art is all about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> Yes, strikes are based on a withdrawal of labour and these are effective when they directly impact on the bosses' business. But guess which strikes are most effective... those which affect infrastructure and inconvenience the public. That's why RMT, ASLEF and transport sections of Unite have the most clout these days and it's why miners and other workers' actions could lead to those inconvenient power cuts in the 70s.
> 
> Obviously, strikes are about a lot more than inconvenience, and there's probably lots to criticise JSO* for, but inconveniencing the public isn't it.
> 
> * I still have no clue about what chucking soup or beans at works of art is all about.


Clearly with paintings it's beans a long way in front of cheese


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience (lots of strikes don’t affect the public at all). If inconvenience worked then strikers would remain at work on full pay and glue themselves to infrastructure in their time off.
> 
> Back when Greenpeace actually did stuff, they did direct action and were often successful, but they took direct action against relevant targets, *got widespread media coverage, and widespread public support*. They never blocked roads or tried to exert pressure by annoying or inconveniencing people.


Did they fuck.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 12, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> Did they fuck.



I have so many examples. How about the "Ban the burn" campaign, against incinerating toxic waste at sea?



			https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lisa_Bunin/publication/233135920_Reconceptualizing_Radical_Environmentalism_Greenpeace's_Campaign_to_Ban_the_Burning_of_Toxic_Waste_at_Sea/links/583c9bb908ae1ff459830226/Reconceptualizing-Radical-Environmentalism-Greenpeaces-Campaign-to-Ban-the-Burning-of-Toxic-Waste-at-Sea.pdf
		


"As one key element of a multi-pronged campaign, Greenpeace launched direct actions to alert the public to this polluting technology. The most successful action involved trailing the burnship, Vesta, to the North Sea burnsite with its flagship, Sirius. Campaigners boarded Vesta, chained themselves to the chimney, and hung a banner that read "Ban the Burn." They prevented an assault on the North Sea in true Greenpeace style—forcing the burnship back to shore with campaigners chained to its chimney. The media captured the action on film and in photographs which circulated to locations across the globe along with wire stories detailing the hazards associated with the use of the technology."

"This action strategy was combined with supporter mailings, newsletters, and door-to-door canvassing. Greenpeace also prepared scientific and technical documents and commissioned research to contribute to international debates on ocean incineration and the potential for reducing the types of waste commonly burned at sea at the source of generation."

"Support for ocean incineration plummeted in Europe during a London Dumping Convention scientific meeting in 1988 when the British Independent newspaper headline revealed that Greenpeace had uncovered a fundamental
flaw in ocean incineration theory. The article stated that the theory used to support incineration operations for 20 years had been discredited by new scientific evidence presented by Greenpeace at the meeting.
In the wake of this publicity, Greenpeace helped the Danish government draft a resolution to ban ocean incineration for submission to the London Dumping Convention. All Nordic nations and most South Pacific and Latin American signatories supported the resolution."


----------



## NoXion (Nov 12, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Widespread public support….
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Any activist organisation as notable as Greenpeace is going to attract criticism worthy of an article on Wikipedia. That doesn't necessarily mean those criticisms reflect general public opinion. So which part of that article is relevant?


----------



## edcraw (Nov 12, 2022)

NoXion said:


> Any activist organisation as notable as Greenpeace is going to attract criticism worthy of an article on Wikipedia. That doesn't necessarily mean those criticisms reflect general public opinion. So which part of that article is relevant?


Bizarre that anyone would claim that Greenpeace didn’t face huge backlashes - pretty sure they were called “yogurt weaving hippies” etc - now it’s “tofu eating wokerati” of course. 

Everyone attacking JSO here would have attacked Greenpeace back in the day. Very reminiscent of Republicans now praising MLK. These protests shift the narrative you lot just need to catch up.


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Have you seen the popular media talking about the licensing of new fossil fuel extraction since these protests started?What has been licensed recently or is likely to be soon?


The Jackdaw gas field, for one:





						Shell invests in the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea | Shell Global
					

BG International Limited, an affiliate of Shell U.K. Limited, has taken the final investment decision (FID) to develop the Jackdaw gas field in the UK North Sea, following regulatory approval earlier this year.




					www.shell.com
				



I'm sure there's others, Jackdaw just stuck in my head as an example of how there seems to be some curse on the name of ACG publications.


platinumsage said:


> Strikes aren’t comparable because they work fundamentally due to a withdrawal of labour, not inconvenience...


I have some bad news for you about what the effects of labour being withdrawn are.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 12, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Bizarre that anyone would claim that Greenpeace didn’t face huge backlashes - pretty sure they were called “yogurt weaving hippies” etc - now it’s “tofu eating wokerati” of course.
> 
> Everyone attacking JSO here would have attacked Greenpeace back in the day. Very reminiscent of Republicans now praising MLK. These protests shift the narrative you lot just need to catch up.



I don't remember claiming there was no backlash. You linked to a page talking about criticisms from academics and Nobel laureates. But I didn't find anything about the prevailing opinion of the general public.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 12, 2022)

NoXion said:


> I don't remember claiming there was no backlash. You linked to a page talking about criticisms from academics and Nobel laureates. But I didn't find anything about the prevailing opinion of the general public.


Platty Sage was making out that Greenpeace had the full backing of the general public which is obv bollocks. I’m glad you agree he’s wrong - should be everyone’s default position tbh.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 12, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> The Jackdaw gas field, for one:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Did JSO get Jackdaw in the Daily Mirror or something?



hitmouse said:


> I have some bad news for you about what the effects of labour being withdrawn are.



Affecting profits and shareholders isn't the same as causing inconvenience to the public. Most strikes don't inconvenience the public. Certain one will, but as I said if inconvenience to the public is the method of achieving strike demands, that doesn't actually need a strike and can be done in spare time while remaining on full pay. Why didn't the miners just keep working and block the roads and railways on their days off?


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 12, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Affecting profits and shareholders isn't the same as causing inconvenience to the public. Most strikes don't inconvenience the public. Certain one will, but as I said if inconvenience to the public is the method of achieving strike demands, that doesn't actually need a strike and can be done in spare time while remaining on full pay. Why didn't the miners just keep working and block the roads and railways on their days off?


It isn't, but you never said "inconvenience to the public", you just said "inconvenience", and I still think all strikes, by definition, are pretty inconvenient to someone. Strikes are effective because they disrupt the economy, and blocking roads and railways also achieves that. And wasn't one of the major factors leading to the defeat of the miners' strike that it was isolated, which means that if railworkers had come out and caused more disruption/inconvenience, they would've been much more likely to win?

Christ, I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for those who stayed out in 84/85, but you'd think someone would hesitate a bit before going "why don't these JSO numpties use proper effective tactics that have been shown to work, like the ones that won the miners their famous victory in 1985?"


----------



## 8ball (Nov 12, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Bizarre that anyone would claim that Greenpeace didn’t face huge backlashes - pretty sure they were called “yogurt weaving hippies” etc - now it’s “tofu eating wokerati” of course.



I’m guessing the poster concerned wasn’t paying that much attention (or was yet to be conceived) during the 1980s.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

I posted details about a successful Greenpeace protest that had widespread support of the public up thread, but everyone ignored it. No point in posting more examples.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> It isn't, but you never said "inconvenience to the public", you just said "inconvenience", and I still think all strikes, by definition, are pretty inconvenient to someone. Strikes are effective because they disrupt the economy, and blocking roads and railways also achieves that. And wasn't one of the major factors leading to the defeat of the miners' strike that it was isolated, which means that if railworkers had come out and caused more disruption/inconvenience, they would've been much more likely to win?
> 
> Christ, I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for those who stayed out in 84/85, but you'd think someone would hesitate a bit before going "why don't these JSO numpties use proper effective tactics that have been shown to work, like the ones that won the miners their famous victory in 1985?"



That’s not what I’m saying is it. 

The claim was made that strikes in general are effective due to disrupting and inconveniencing people, so JSO can be effective through the same tactics.

My point is if inconvenience is the key to strikes, why don’t strikers just cause inconvenience without striking and losing their pay? The reason they don’t is that JSO-style inconvenience is not the key to strikes.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 13, 2022)

Another thread where platinumsage asks questions and then just dismisses answers that don’t fit his narrative 🥱


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 13, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> That’s not what I’m saying is it.
> 
> The claim was made that strikes in general are effective due to disrupting and inconveniencing people, so JSO can be effective through the same tactics.
> 
> My point is if inconvenience is the key to strikes, why don’t strikers just cause inconvenience without striking and losing their pay? The reason they don’t is that JSO-style inconvenience is not the key to strikes.


Wot Serge actually said was:


Serge Forward said:


> It's intended to cause inconvenience. If something doesn't cause inconvenience them it has zero effect. Imagine a strike that inconveniences no one. What's the point?


Can you give an example of a successful strike that did not cause inconvenience? Also, you seem to reckon that JSO-style causing of inconvenience, which carries pretty much a guarantee of arrest, the likelihood of criminal charges, and the subsequent possibility of missing work and losing pay when dealing with the fallout of said criminal charges, has a higher cost to the causer than going on strike, and probably being able to claim strike pay through the union. I'm not sure you've thought this one through.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Wot Serge actually said was:
> 
> Can you give an example of a successful strike that did not cause inconvenience?



Pretty sure no members of the public were affected by the successful RR strikes recently:









						Rolls-Royce Barnoldswick: Deal with Unite union secures plant's future
					

Manufacturing at a once-threatened plant will continue for at least 10 years, the firm announces.



					www.bbc.com
				




No inconvenience, but certainly not zero effect.


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 13, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Pretty sure no members of the public were affected by the successful RR strikes recently:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not in the short term, but if it continued for long enough I reckon the public would definitely notice if there was a shortage of aeroplane fan blades. It's like the successful Chep strikes - in the short term absolutely no-one gives a shit if workers at a pallet repair factory are working or not, if supermarkets and warehouse start finding that a shortage of pallets is meaning they can't load and unload stuff along their distribution chain then it very much would have quite a notable affect on the public.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

hitmouse said:


> Not in the short term, but if it continued for long enough I reckon the public would definitely notice if there was a shortage of aeroplane fan blades. It's like the successful Chep strikes - in the short term absolutely no-one gives a shit if workers at a pallet repair factory are working or not, if supermarkets and warehouse start finding that a shortage of pallets is meaning they can't load and unload stuff along their distribution chain then it very much would have quite a notable affect on the public.



The strike didn't need to cause inconvenience to be successful though, did it? It was a success without reaching that stage.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

Can't believe you're defending the statement "if something doesn't cause inconvenience then it has zero effect." It's obviously bollocks.


----------



## hitmouse (Nov 13, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> The strike didn't need to cause inconvenience to be successful though, did it? It was a success without reaching that stage.


It absolutely did cause inconvenience. Not as much inconvenience for the general travelling public as it might have done had it continued for longer, but I do not think the bosses of Rolls-Royce were looking at it thinking "this is a tremendously convenient situation".


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Pretty sure no members of the public were affected by the successful RR strikes recently:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The reason it was successful was because it affected bosses and clients. Which of these groups are outside the set "members of the public"?


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> The reason it was successful was because it affected bosses and clients. Which of these groups are outside the set "members of the public"?



"the public" and refers to people at large, and not every single person. This will depend on context (e.g. "police officers should be held to a higher standard than members of the public" - if you whine that police officers are members of the public too and can't be held to a higher standard then you're revealing yourself to be an unsuccessful pedant. 

In this context JSO are attempting to use inconvenience to one set of people ("the public") and thereby force that set of people to exert influence over another set of people ("the government"). The aren't acting on the government directly but using a proxy, which they hope will magnify their influence in terms of numbers. 

The RR strikes caused a material loss, or threat thereof, to the very set of people who they hoped to influence ("the bosses and shareholders"). I don't think the workers won because the bosses were tired of the extra meetings or paperwork that the strike caused.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> "the public" and refers to people at large, and not every single person. This will depend on context (e.g. "police officers should be held to a higher standard than members of the public" - if you whine that police officers are members of the public too and can't be held to a higher standard then you're revealing yourself to be an unsuccessful pedant.
> 
> In this context JSO are attempting to use inconvenience to one set of people ("the public") and thereby force that set of people to exert influence over another set of people ("the government"). The aren't acting on the government directly but using a proxy, which they hope will magnify their influence in terms of numbers.
> 
> The RR strikes caused a material loss, or threat thereof, to the very set of people who they hoped to influence ("the bosses and shareholders"). I don't think the workers won because the bosses were tired of the extra meetings or paperwork that the strike caused.


Of course cops aren't members of the public, I neither said nor suggested they were


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 13, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Of course cops aren't members of the public, I neither said nor suggested they were



As I said, it depends on the context. "Staff working in the library were told to keep members of the public away from the _Pickman's Model_ display outside the front entrance, as it was deemed likely to suffer structural failure" doesn't mean that library staff had to spend the day shooing each other away.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 16, 2022)




----------



## WouldBe (Nov 16, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


>



They'll need to bring packed lunches with them in case they get nicked then.


----------



## Karl Masks (Nov 16, 2022)

WouldBe said:


> They'll need to bring packed lunches with them in case they get nicked then.


I know where they can get some soup


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 19, 2022)

Just Stop Something protester targets David Attenborough 









						Protester arrested after reportedly approaching Sir David Attenborough in Weymouth
					

A climate change protester has been arrested after reportedly approaching Sir David Attenborough at a Weymouth restaurant.




					www.dorsetecho.co.uk


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 19, 2022)

Did you read it? It was Animal Rebellion apparently and it was at a swanky fish restaurant in Weymouth which is a quite an economically poor area. 

Quote from the article: 

"The Catch is a symbol of excess and inequality in today's world, Weymouth has average wages amongst the lowest in the UK and is at huge risk of sea level rises.

"Yet this restaurant still continues business as usual amongst the worst cost-of-living crisis many will ever experience."


----------



## edcraw (Nov 20, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Just Stop Something protester targets David Attenborough
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just say you don’t agree with their point rather than how they go about getting it across.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 20, 2022)

WouldBe said:


> They'll need to bring packed lunches with them in case they get nicked then.



I’m sure the coppers can find a bit of wafer thin ham somewhere.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 20, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> Did you read it? It was Animal Rebellion apparently and it was at a swanky fish restaurant in Weymouth which is a quite an economically poor area.
> 
> Quote from the article:
> 
> ...



What is that supposed to mean? She wants to shut down restaurants serving fish but only expensive ones?

Then it goes on to say she wanted to tell David Attenborough to stop making wildlife documentaries. I can’t see what her point is.


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 20, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> What is that supposed to mean? She wants to shut down restaurants serving fish but only expensive ones?
> 
> Then it goes on to say she wanted to tell David Attenborough to stop making wildlife documentaries. I can’t see what her point is.


I suspect with her being part of Animal Rebellion she is against all seafood. Which considering the impact that's having on our oceans I can appreciate even though I wouldn't go as far as demanding it ends. 

I can't see where she demands he stops making wildlife programs? Admittedly it's hard to read fully due to all the adverts. Quite the opposite she seems to respect him from the article. 

Personally don't have many problems with rich people at ridiculously expensive restaurants being targeted. It makes a little bit more sense than pouring milk over supermarket floors which was a pretty awful waste. 

I'm not a fan of animal rebellion on the whole. This woman also seems a bit odd to be honest - the pleas to speak to David via letter etc she seems a bit obsessed. Still confused why you posted it on a thread that is about just stop oil.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 20, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> I suspect with her being part of Animal Rebellion she is against all seafood. Which considering the impact that's having on our oceans I can appreciate even though I wouldn't go as far as demanding it ends.
> 
> I can't see where she demands he stops making wildlife programs? Admittedly it's hard to read fully due to all the adverts. Quite the opposite she seems to respect him from the article.
> 
> Personally don't have many problems with rich people at ridiculously expensive restaurants being targeted. It makes a little bit more sense than pouring milk over supermarket floors which was a pretty awful waste.



She targeted David Attenborough not the restaurant (separate protesters targeted Gordon Ramsey's restaurant yesterday and shut it down).

This is what she said about Attenborough:

"We don't need another documentary series showing us that we are losing, some 150 species going extinct globally every single day. What we need is action. Sir David is in a unique position to tell the truth about the biodiversity crisis. He has the chance to leave a legacy of love, care, and of being the forerunner of a better world."

So there it is, Attenborough hasn't done enough to inform people about biodiversity loss.  



BristolEcho said:


> Still confused why you posted it on a thread that is about just stop oil.



JSO/AR/XR/IB etc, they're all the same group - this woman was previously arrested for JSOing. No reason we need to splinter our threads about them.


----------



## Karl Masks (Nov 20, 2022)

8ball said:


> I’m sure the coppers can find a bit of wafer thin ham somewhere.


police cruelty is fun though


----------



## BristolEcho (Nov 20, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> She targeted David Attenborough not the restaurant (separate protesters targeted Gordon Ramsey's restaurant yesterday and shut it down).
> 
> This is what she said about Attenborough:
> 
> ...


So she didn't say that she wanted him to stop making documentaries then? She just argued that we don't need more/it's not enough. I agree targeting David Attenborough is odd, but she targeted him at the restaurant and also raised issues about the restaurant specifically. You're just cherry picking bits that you want I think. 

They aren't all the same group. Some of them are splinters and have cross sections sure. All of them deeply flawed. Again though you cherry picked and misrepresented the story presenting it as JSO when it doesn't mention them at all. 

 What are XR up to these days anyway? Not heard much about them for ages.


----------



## platinumsage (Nov 20, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> So she didn't say that she wanted him to stop making documentaries then? She just argued that we don't need more/it's not enough. I agree targeting David Attenborough is odd, but she targeted him at the restaurant and also raised issues about the restaurant specifically. You're just cherry picking bits that you want I think.



That's what I got from her protest action. If I was meant to get some other message then her tactics failed.



> They aren't all the same group. Some of them are splinters and have cross sections sure. All of them deeply flawed. Again though you cherry picked and misrepresented the story presenting it as JSO when it doesn't mention them at all.



I didn't misrepresent anything



> What are XR up to these days anyway? Not heard much about them for ages.



Busy having their members chuck soup around and lunge at David Attenborough under the guise of some other front organization I assume.


----------



## edcraw (Nov 20, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> What are XR up to these days anyway? Not heard much about them for ages.


They’re doing stuff like this - talking to people & hosting talks:









						As The World Looks Up, We Step Up - Extinction Rebellion UK
					

Project 3.5 Already all around the UK local people are getting organised. It’s time to stop feeling powerless and alone in the face of the climate crisis, and get to know other amazing local people who want to make a difference too. How It Works Three simple steps in quick succession will bring...




					extinctionrebellion.uk
				




Presumably the sort of thing people moaning on here about JSO etc would support but unsurprisingly it doesn’t get as much publicity.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 20, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> police cruelty is fun though



What does if for you?  Steak?


----------



## Karl Masks (Nov 20, 2022)

8ball said:


> What does if for you?  Steak?


Does what? What are you even talking about?


----------



## Karl Masks (Nov 20, 2022)

BristolEcho said:


> So she didn't say that she wanted him to stop making documentaries then? She just argued that we don't need more/it's not enough. I agree targeting David Attenborough is odd, but she targeted him at the restaurant and also raised issues about the restaurant specifically. You're just cherry picking bits that you want I think.
> 
> They aren't all the same group. Some of them are splinters and have cross sections sure. All of them deeply flawed. Again though you cherry picked and misrepresented the story presenting it as JSO when it doesn't mention them at all.
> 
> What are XR up to these days anyway? Not heard much about them for ages.


They had a big demo outside Barclays in Bristol last week. Seemed pretty good, but I did notice that none of the protesters were young folk. It was all quite older folk. Make of that what you will, I have alerted the relevant authorities


----------



## 8ball (Nov 20, 2022)

Karl Masks said:


> Does what? What are you even talking about?



Sorry, it not if.  

Sausage fingers.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 28, 2022)

OK, this looks alright.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2022)

brogdale said:


> OK, this looks alright.



Did they have another team going slowly in the opposite direction?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 28, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Did they have another team going slowly in the opposite direction?


Hope so


----------



## NoXion (Dec 5, 2022)

Apparently Just Stop Oil may escalate to "slashing" paintings:









						Just Stop Oil warn they may start slashing famous artworks to escalate their campaign
					

Just Stop Oil warns if their demands are not met, they will escalate their actions




					www.independent.co.uk
				




So all that guff said in defence of them chucking food on works of art protected by perspex was completely disingenuous bollocks, wasn't it? It's plainly obvious that the government was never going to be swayed by some randoms putting paintings not even owned by the government under the fake threat of damage. So now that the media is becoming bored of the stunts so far and the totally predictable result of fuck-all happening has come to pass, it seems that JSO may be looking to escalate their approach.

Starting to feel like a Mafia operation now. "Nice artwork you have there, would be a shame if something happened to it... "


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 5, 2022)

NoXion said:


> Apparently Just Stop Oil may escalate to "slashing" paintings:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I wonder whether this will lead to a) the government immediately halting all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK, or b) increased security in art galleries and more draconian actions against protesters?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 5, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> I wonder whether this will lead to a) the government immediately halting all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK, or b) increased security in art galleries and more draconian actions against protesters?



Come on, man. Don't you know that the best way of getting a body of people to do something you want, is to threaten to damage the stuff belonging to a completely different body of people?


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 5, 2022)

NoXion said:


> Come on, man. Don't you know that the best way of getting a body of people to do something you want, is to threaten to damage the stuff belonging to a completely different body of people?



Cease your sarky comments immediately or I'll eat tomorrow's advent calendar chocolate.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 5, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Cease your sarky comments immediately or I'll eat tomorrow's advent calendar chocolate.


A man who means business


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 5, 2022)

edcraw said:


> No one is out of tacking climate change by these protests - only climate change denying twats say that. This has made the headlines for weeks now.
> 
> Road transport is a huge cause of CO2 emissions - you and others said they should choose targets that make sense so you should be happy their targeting one of the major motorways. Stop arguing in bad faith and just admit that you don’t think anything should be done about the climate crisis.
> 
> View attachment 351141


Where is energy use for computers etc?
This tower of babel we have in our pockets. All of us with Multiple browser tabs. Every account for every useless app. Pinging back and forth packets of data. Pointlessly.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 5, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> Where is energy use for computers etc?
> This tower of babel we have in our pockets. All of us with Multiple browser tabs. Every account for every useless app. Pinging back and forth packets of data. Pointlessly.



I always find it weird how the question of energy keeps on circling back to the habits of ordinary individuals. Neoliberal propaganda seems to be surprisingly effective at getting people to forget that tackling climate change is a systemic problem requiring systemic solutions. You can see it in the threads on this very forum about keeping warm, there are people who actually _feel guilty_ about not wanting to be cold and miserable. Our ingrained desire to be conscientious is being weaponised against us in the class war.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 5, 2022)

i've done 20 years in business IT. its a genuine concern. not a case of doing enough recycling.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 5, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> i've done 20 years in business IT. its a genuine concern. not a case of doing enough recycling.



The genuine concern should be around how the energy is generated in the first place. Energy costs money, so industries will always be looking to reduce said costs by increasing efficiency, regardless of climate change. But no matter how many improvements in efficiency we make, regardless how many times we get lectured by the rich and powerful for having the gall to be online or go out and have fun (while they of course swan around in their fancy cars and private planes between their multiple homes which they keep nice and warm), it will be all for naught if we don't drastically reduce our combustion of fossil fuels. Governments and corporations control the majority of the world's wealth and resources, so it is only fitting that the majority of the responsibility should rest upon their shoulders.

But unfortunately, there seems to be this equivocation between reducing carbon emissions and "reducing consumption", AKA ostensibly ecologically-motivated austerity. Sure, reducing consumption across the board will reduce carbon emissions. There's an alluring logic about the proposition. But said logic is based on the fundamentally false premise that the problem is with ordinary people using energy, rather than stubborn recalcitrance on the part of those who own the means by which it generated.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 5, 2022)

I don’t see the rich and powerful telling us off for being on line. We are being conditioned for it. 
I’m asking (in a confusing roundabout way) where is IT / data centers featuring in that chart?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 5, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> I don’t see the rich and powerful telling us off for being on line. We are being conditioned for it.
> I’m asking (in a confusing roundabout way) where is IT / data centers featuring in that chart?



I reckon it would be under "Commercial" or "Other industry", depending. But either one of those are subsidiary to the biggest chunk of that chart by a long chalk, the one labelled "Energy" and numbered at 73%. If I'm reading the chart right, then that means that nearly three-quarters of all anthropogenic carbon emissions are being produced by electricity generation. I'm assuming that all those data centres and servers powering the internet are mostly running on grid power, so if we were to deal with the question of how we generate the electricity to supply said grid, then that would render the question largely moot.

Worrying about people using the internet when 73% of total carbon emissions come from electrical generation seems a little... well, misplaced to put it mildly.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 5, 2022)

I'm not worrying about people using the internet. I said it's omission was strange. Almost like you dont need to worry about that.


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 8, 2022)

The German equivalent are a right laugh:


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 10, 2022)

Surprisingly balanced article from the FT today:



			Welcome to nginx!


----------



## ska invita (Dec 10, 2022)

Rob Ray said:


> Surprisingly balanced article from the FT today:
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to nginx!


I thought this bit was interesting:

"The House of Commons did organise a citizens’ assembly in 2020(opens a new window). A group of 108 people heard expert evidence, then deliberated on how the UK should reach net zero. They came down in favour of policies such as a ban on gas boilers and a frequent-flyer tax that increased the more often people flew. They rejected the use of fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage (the technology proposed by the government for the new Cumbrian coal mine). It showed that when citizens pause to think about climate, they are more radical than their politicians. But the assembly’s conclusions were ignored."


----------



## platinumsage (Dec 10, 2022)

ska invita said:


> It showed that when citizens pause to think about climate, they are more radical than their politicians. "



No shit, because they aren’t accountable for any of the negative or unintended consequences of their decisions, and don’t actually have to implement them or persuade anyone to agree with them. It’s why citizens assemblies are a shit idea.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 10, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> No shit, because they aren’t accountable for any of the negative or unintended consequences of their decisions, and don’t actually have to implement them or persuade anyone to agree with them. It’s why citizens assemblies are a shit idea.


They are at least as accountable as politicians, in that they have to back into society and defend what they've done. Half the time politicians are very isolated from the consequences of their actions and socially move in circles where no-one will be rude to them about their many, many failures, because it's all one big failure club where everyone's getting rich from failing. Your attempts to defend the status quo are rather desperate.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 11, 2022)

above all i thought it was interesting that a citizens panel even took place, and what its finding were - very reasonable


----------



## BristolEcho (Dec 12, 2022)

British Museum have said they may drop BP sponsorship. 









						Is the writing on the wall for the British Museum’s BP deal?
					

Chair of the museum, George Osborne, says it no longer wants to be a ‘destination for climate protest’




					www.theguardian.com
				




Doubt Osbourne can be trusted mind.


----------



## edcraw (Dec 21, 2022)

Bloody Just Stop Oil deserve to be run over!!!


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

No Ed. You do. By your own privileged entitled cognitive dissonance.


----------



## edcraw (Dec 21, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> No Ed. You do. By your own privileged entitled cognitive dissonance.


😂 what are you on about?


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

You deserve to be run over.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

So you can declare cars aren’t harmful whatsoever.


----------



## edcraw (Dec 21, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> You deserve to be run over.


Cheers mate - still no idea what you’re on about…


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

edcraw said:


> Bloody Just Stop Oil deserve to be run over!!!



It was my response to this.


----------



## edcraw (Dec 21, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> It was my response to this.


Do you know what it is?


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

Is this a trick question?


----------



## edcraw (Dec 21, 2022)

Boris Sprinkler said:


> Is this a trick question?


No - it’s a junction in Edinburgh where drivers ignore the fact they can’t go down there. So people are blocking it to make them obey the law yet drivers seem to like to try and run them over. It’s almost like a lot of drivers are just selfish twats.


----------



## Boris Sprinkler (Dec 21, 2022)

i was misreading your post. Sorry.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 29, 2022)

Not massively surprised even though they reported (from the article) a quarterly profit of almost $20 billion (£17.3 billion) in October. and their financial officer is reported to have said the tax would cost the company "over $2 billion". You'd think based on the above figure that they could afford it.









						Energy giant ExxonMobil sues EU to block energy windfall tax
					

The US company says the levy on its profits will discourage future investment in Europe.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## ska invita (Yesterday at 9:33 AM)

Incredible result, especially so as the judge told the jury to find them guilty, plus the usual defence in such cases is to prevent a greater harm (climate change) and the judge deliberately blocked them from saying this.

Unanimous not guilty 









						BREAKING: FOUR INSULATE BRITAIN SUPPORTERS VINDICATED AFTER JURY RETURNS UNANIMOUS NOT GUILTY VERDICT - Insulate Britain
					

Four Insulate Britain supporters were found not guilty of causing a public nuisance by a Crown Court jury today in the fourth jury trial relating to Insulate Britain’s campaign of nonviolent civil resistance last year undertaken to demand the UK government insulates Britain’s cold and leaky...




					insulatebritain.com


----------



## teqniq (Yesterday at 9:50 AM)

Judge sounds like a complete scumbag. Hope he's really pissed off.


----------



## ska invita (Yesterday at 10:37 AM)

teqniq said:


> Judge sounds like a complete scumbag. Hope he's really pissed off.


id like to know more about that - how can a judge decide to block what is the usual avenue of defence? is it down to the whim of a judge or has there been a law change?


----------



## NoXion (Yesterday at 11:51 AM)

What's the point in even having a jury if the judge is just gonna tell them what decision to make?


----------



## Rob Ray (Yesterday at 1:57 PM)

It's not uncommon for juries to react negatively to being told what to do by a (dare I say activist) judge – everyone from DSEI protesters to Bristol rioters have been saved by the recalcitrant people's will.


----------



## redsquirrel (Yesterday at 4:33 PM)

Good news and good stuff from the jury who obviously told the judge to go swivel


----------



## NoXion (Yesterday at 5:23 PM)

Rob Ray said:


> It's not uncommon for juries to react negatively to being told what to do by a (dare I say activist) judge – everyone from DSEI protesters to Bristol rioters have been saved by the recalcitrant people's will.



Which makes judges bossing juries around like that even more mind-boggling; unless the beak was being a bit clever and engaging in a bit of reverse psychology.


----------



## ska invita (Yesterday at 7:02 PM)

NoXion said:


> Which makes judges bossing juries around like that even more mind-boggling; unless the beak was being a bit clever and engaging in a bit of reverse psychology.


Its not that, he's got previous for this and seems to get a lot of climate activism cases 
This 2019


----------



## NoXion (Yesterday at 7:26 PM)

ska invita said:


> Its not that, he's got previous for this and seems to get a lot of climate activism cases
> This 2019




Well then I've got no other explanations other than judicial arrogance. Let me guess, the judge is an older white gentleman from a wealthy background?


----------



## Rob Ray (Yesterday at 9:36 PM)

Aged 52 with a side gig as a landlord, apparently. And yes, pink as a slab of ham.


----------



## Dystopiary (Yesterday at 10:35 PM)

Good news, despite the judge being an arsehole. As a slight aside, there's something really great about people of all ages standing together in solidarity like that. 25, 37, 59 and 80 years old.


----------

